4 ms·

> Beyond the obvious example of people forced into it by violence, there is also a huge population of people that are trying to feed themselves, or their kids,

> Beyond the obvious example of people forced into it by violence, there is also a huge population of people that are trying to feed themselves, or their kids, or their addictions. Any you are exactly WHO to tell them it is not okay to do this or that with their OWN body ???

tptacek 10y ago
Where do you draw the line? Should people be able to sell their kidneys? How about retinas? How about both kidneys? It's their body, after all.
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  I don't know if I agree with their arguments, but people have argued that people should be able to sell kidneys. Currently, this is illegal - people end up forming "donation chains" to spread the availability of organs.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Of course, there are coherent arguments for this. Among other things, it makes organs more available to recipients. But then where do you draw the line from there? If the principle is "my body my rules", why not sell both kidneys?
    - joering2 10y ago
      Why not? You stupid to sell both kidneys you die. How is that your problem?? If I have a need to help other people to the extend that it will kill me, let it be!
      - tptacek 10y ago
        Then, should people be allowed to accept money to "perform" in snuff films? Or is it only OK to sell ones life if there's some material net benefit to other people that results from it?
  - clavalle 10y ago
    I think people should be able to sell their organs, too /if/ they are perfectly free to make that choice and in no way coerced, actively or passively, to do so. But, in a world where one can sell their organs, would we refuse public assistance to people who still have both of their kidneys? Would we say to the poor "Why are you asking for help? You have $50,000 buried in your back! Come back when you are truly desperate."
- savanaly 10y ago
  Having consensual sex with someone isn't the same as giving up both your kidneys and retinas.
  - blhack 10y ago
    Coerced consent isn't consent.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    That's true but irrelevant given the argument I'm responding to.
- fixermark 10y ago
  Generally, we draw it somewhere south of "Permanent physical damage to one's own body" and somewhere north of "I could sit in my underwear and watch anime all day, but if I put on these pants and go sit in this cube and write this code for these people, I'll make some money, so..."
- existencebox 10y ago
  Let me pose a question to you. (Or perhaps a rephrasing of your own) Should we allow people to end their own lives? And at the point that we do, would we disallow them from also selling their organs? I'll openly admit I err on the side of allowing one full control over their body; as someone staring down the barrel of dementia/Alzheimer, I selfishly want that choice when the time comes.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Are you asking because you want to know what I personally think? Remember, I'm just trying to get a coherent principle out of an angry objection. I think we should allow assisted suicide but regulate it carefully. I do not think we should sell the organs of people who end their lives this way (not that there's likely to be a market for those organs).
    - existencebox 10y ago
      Was primarily curious to what the argument would be from someone taking the other side of this debate; if you think your personal opinion would build on that I'd naturally also be curious. Regarding your second point on selling organs, for me it would heavily depend on our medical understanding of the transmission of whatever the critical condition was. If there is good science that e.g. Alzheimer patients can still be kidney donors, I'd think it'd be both impractical and unjust not to release those organs as the owner sees fit.
- joering2 10y ago
  I don't "draw a line" with someone elses body. Why would you? This is why the government can get so deep in our lives because people want to "Care" for other people's own bodies. If someone needs money to pay for their mother's surgery (on out of billion possible examples), then yes let them sell their kidney!
  - tptacek 10y ago
    What about both kidneys?
    - joering2 10y ago
      What about them?
- virmundi 10y ago
  Yes. To all of that. The second kidney would be a death sentence. If they sell it, they can do it for whatever reason they want. It is theirs. Life is not something to be held on to at all costs. Perhaps selling two kidneys would end that person's suffering and the resulting funds would end their children's or their friends'. People make calculated risks all of the time. My parents are not cool with me starting my own company that sells software services. They think that is a terrible risk. It is. I could lose everything. But I'm free to do that under the law. People take calculated risks when logging. Dismemberment is a real threat. Yet the funds they could make are worth it to them. Who are you to tell them they can't? I mean it when I ask, "Who are you to tell the they can't?" On what moral or ethical grounds do you restrict a person's liberty? If the worst that can happen is they die, why does that give you the authority to intervene against their wishes?
  - tptacek 10y ago
    People take calculated risks when logging, but the logging industry has intensive safety requirements. There's a difference between accepting a heavily mitigated risk and exchanging money for your certain demise. This is a slippery slope argument; in a technical but real sense we accept mortal risk whenever we leave the house. Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not?
    - virmundi 10y ago
      > Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Ideally no more than one parent, presuming a two parent household, but yes, I'm morally okay with that. The loss of a parent is sad. It will have an emotional impact. I think that the impact, coupled to the education the parent is seeking will probably cause the child to appreciate and succeed even more. Knowing that dad died to procure the college education will probably cause the child to work harder in HS and college. The parents have agency. They can look at a situation to see if they can get an outcome they appreciate. > Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not? No, but merely on the arbitrary like that I think agency matters. Agency underlying all things is a premise. I just state it as a fact. If that fact is wrong, all conclusions from it are at risk. I accept that philosophically. I also posit that mental illness precludes agency.
- saint_fiasco 10y ago
  Kidneys and retinas are actually an easier case, compared to prostitution. Transplants are difficult surgeries that require hospitals and specialized labor, so they are very easy to regulate. Of course people should be able to sell their organs if they have permission of a doctor (who would get in trouble if they authorize a coercive transplant, just like euthanasia) and the recipient (who should be decided ahead of time to discourage organ hoarders and ensure compatibility)
clavalle 10y ago
Someone who would rather they have a real choice whether to do it or not.

tptacek 10y ago

Where do you draw the line? Should people be able to sell their kidneys? How about retinas? How about both kidneys? It's their body, after all.

pavel_lishin 10y ago
I don't know if I agree with their arguments, but people have argued that people should be able to sell kidneys. Currently, this is illegal - people end up forming "donation chains" to spread the availability of organs.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Of course, there are coherent arguments for this. Among other things, it makes organs more available to recipients. But then where do you draw the line from there? If the principle is "my body my rules", why not sell both kidneys?
  - joering2 10y ago
    Why not? You stupid to sell both kidneys you die. How is that your problem?? If I have a need to help other people to the extend that it will kill me, let it be!
    - tptacek 10y ago
      Then, should people be allowed to accept money to "perform" in snuff films? Or is it only OK to sell ones life if there's some material net benefit to other people that results from it?
- clavalle 10y ago
  I think people should be able to sell their organs, too /if/ they are perfectly free to make that choice and in no way coerced, actively or passively, to do so. But, in a world where one can sell their organs, would we refuse public assistance to people who still have both of their kidneys? Would we say to the poor "Why are you asking for help? You have $50,000 buried in your back! Come back when you are truly desperate."
savanaly 10y ago
Having consensual sex with someone isn't the same as giving up both your kidneys and retinas.
- blhack 10y ago
  Coerced consent isn't consent.
- tptacek 10y ago
  That's true but irrelevant given the argument I'm responding to.
fixermark 10y ago
Generally, we draw it somewhere south of "Permanent physical damage to one's own body" and somewhere north of "I could sit in my underwear and watch anime all day, but if I put on these pants and go sit in this cube and write this code for these people, I'll make some money, so..."
existencebox 10y ago
Let me pose a question to you. (Or perhaps a rephrasing of your own) Should we allow people to end their own lives? And at the point that we do, would we disallow them from also selling their organs? I'll openly admit I err on the side of allowing one full control over their body; as someone staring down the barrel of dementia/Alzheimer, I selfishly want that choice when the time comes.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Are you asking because you want to know what I personally think? Remember, I'm just trying to get a coherent principle out of an angry objection. I think we should allow assisted suicide but regulate it carefully. I do not think we should sell the organs of people who end their lives this way (not that there's likely to be a market for those organs).
  - existencebox 10y ago
    Was primarily curious to what the argument would be from someone taking the other side of this debate; if you think your personal opinion would build on that I'd naturally also be curious. Regarding your second point on selling organs, for me it would heavily depend on our medical understanding of the transmission of whatever the critical condition was. If there is good science that e.g. Alzheimer patients can still be kidney donors, I'd think it'd be both impractical and unjust not to release those organs as the owner sees fit.
joering2 10y ago
I don't "draw a line" with someone elses body. Why would you? This is why the government can get so deep in our lives because people want to "Care" for other people's own bodies. If someone needs money to pay for their mother's surgery (on out of billion possible examples), then yes let them sell their kidney!
- tptacek 10y ago
  What about both kidneys?
  - joering2 10y ago
    What about them?
virmundi 10y ago
Yes. To all of that. The second kidney would be a death sentence. If they sell it, they can do it for whatever reason they want. It is theirs. Life is not something to be held on to at all costs. Perhaps selling two kidneys would end that person's suffering and the resulting funds would end their children's or their friends'. People make calculated risks all of the time. My parents are not cool with me starting my own company that sells software services. They think that is a terrible risk. It is. I could lose everything. But I'm free to do that under the law. People take calculated risks when logging. Dismemberment is a real threat. Yet the funds they could make are worth it to them. Who are you to tell them they can't? I mean it when I ask, "Who are you to tell the they can't?" On what moral or ethical grounds do you restrict a person's liberty? If the worst that can happen is they die, why does that give you the authority to intervene against their wishes?
- tptacek 10y ago
  People take calculated risks when logging, but the logging industry has intensive safety requirements. There's a difference between accepting a heavily mitigated risk and exchanging money for your certain demise. This is a slippery slope argument; in a technical but real sense we accept mortal risk whenever we leave the house. Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not?
  - virmundi 10y ago
    > Do you think parents should be allowed to sell both kidneys in exchange for, say, fully-funded college tuition for their kids? Ideally no more than one parent, presuming a two parent household, but yes, I'm morally okay with that. The loss of a parent is sad. It will have an emotional impact. I think that the impact, coupled to the education the parent is seeking will probably cause the child to appreciate and succeed even more. Knowing that dad died to procure the college education will probably cause the child to work harder in HS and college. The parents have agency. They can look at a situation to see if they can get an outcome they appreciate. > Do you think the mentally ill should be able to sell both their kidneys? Why or why not? No, but merely on the arbitrary like that I think agency matters. Agency underlying all things is a premise. I just state it as a fact. If that fact is wrong, all conclusions from it are at risk. I accept that philosophically. I also posit that mental illness precludes agency.
saint_fiasco 10y ago
Kidneys and retinas are actually an easier case, compared to prostitution. Transplants are difficult surgeries that require hospitals and specialized labor, so they are very easy to regulate. Of course people should be able to sell their organs if they have permission of a doctor (who would get in trouble if they authorize a coercive transplant, just like euthanasia) and the recipient (who should be decided ahead of time to discourage organ hoarders and ensure compatibility)

clavalle 10y ago

Someone who would rather they have a real choice whether to do it or not.