4 ms·

I think that any country that wants to consider legalizing the sale of body parts from living people should probably illustrate how they have effectively elimin

by ygjb 3y ago

I think that any country that wants to consider legalizing the sale of body parts from living people should probably illustrate how they have effectively eliminated human trafficking for other forms of exploitation first. Generally speaking, it is not a moral act to reward people for harming themselves, or allowing themselves to be harmed. Most society overlook this in the name of sport, or in the name of freedom (e.g. drugs, alcohol, driving, and other massively harmful, but shockingly profitable ventures), but the balance of respecting freedom while preventing exploitation is generally a complete shit show as evidenced by the rampant human trafficking, and the ongoing exploitation of addiction that the illicit drug trade represents. The moral arguments also set aside the fact that the overall quality of "ethically sold" organs are likely to be lower due to the overall impact that a life of poverty on individual health has, and that selling an organ is most likely going to be an option of last resort for most people. Personally profiting from an act of self harm doesn't stop it being an act of predation or exploitation.

astrange 3y ago
If donating an organ is self-harm why are you allowed to do it for free?
- ygjb 3y ago
  Because when you remove the financial incentive that leads to outright exploitation, there still remains the case where self-harm can be a moral action. Donating a kidney, for example, or bone marrow, is harmful to the donor, but the trade-off is that it may save the life of another person. People make trade-offs that result in self-harm as part of a moral decision all the time. Firefighters are a great example of this. We (humans and societies in general, because this comment applies to all societies) generally block or allow moral and immoral activity based on the ability of those with power to regulate things. Some things are simple, like murder - generally, killing people is considered immoral, but even then, there is flexibility (for example, measures taken to stop an attacker from causing harm). Some things like organ donation are considered moral complex, and demand extra focus to prevent exploitation.

by ygjb 3y ago

astrange 3y ago

If donating an organ is self-harm why are you allowed to do it for free?

ygjb 3y ago
Because when you remove the financial incentive that leads to outright exploitation, there still remains the case where self-harm can be a moral action. Donating a kidney, for example, or bone marrow, is harmful to the donor, but the trade-off is that it may save the life of another person. People make trade-offs that result in self-harm as part of a moral decision all the time. Firefighters are a great example of this. We (humans and societies in general, because this comment applies to all societies) generally block or allow moral and immoral activity based on the ability of those with power to regulate things. Some things are simple, like murder - generally, killing people is considered immoral, but even then, there is flexibility (for example, measures taken to stop an attacker from causing harm). Some things like organ donation are considered moral complex, and demand extra focus to prevent exploitation.