4 ms·
> I refuse to be a donor. If they want me then make a real donation, say some money towards funeral expenses. You refuse to save lives at literally no cost to
by ebg13 6y ago
> I refuse to be a donor. If they want me then make a real donation, say some money towards funeral expenses.
You refuse to save lives at literally no cost to yourself or anyone you know unless someone pays your family off?
> there's no reason the donor should be left empty handed
The donor is dead! Hands don't get any emptier!
> So I'm not just a grubby meanie out for a buck.
Ok, let's see...
Cost to you? 0.
Cost to your family? 0.
Benefit to others? You could save several lives.
Will only do it for? Money.
Yup, no conflict there.
- srl 6y agoThis sentiment is understandable (and apparently popular), and I suppose GP deserved either a well-reasoned personal attack or a snarky reply... but I don't think it merits a snarky personal attack.
- ebg13 6y agoWhat if I'd split it into two separate replies?
- DrScump 6y agoYou refuse to save lives S/he's already been a living bone marrow donor, presumably already saving a life at considerable risk to oneself (it's surgery for the donor). That's already enough to deserve immunity from snarky insults.
- ebg13 6y ago> That's already enough to deserve immunity from snarky insults. No, I don't think it is. This is a refusal to do something that costs literally nothing purely out of spite. If anything, that negates the good will that might have been earned by the prior act. "I helped someone once, but I'd like everyone else to just die even though it costs me _nothing_ to save them" is not an admirable stance.