I been working on a political and social movement for years. The name or the organization will be called The Actionist Movement (a generic name for a complex ideology). I lost interest in it for years. One of my main goals is Neuropreservation for far future transhumanism. I haven’t gotten to that part because its complex. my philosophy covers a number of issues such as prison and school reform etc. here is what I wrote so far on my Bioethics Agenda (a lot more to write about that).
The book will be called – My Vision: The Manifesto of the Actionist Movement
EUTHANASIA – The option of euthanasia should be avalible for all people, regardless of age, who is suffering with a terminal illness. This option should also be on the table for those who are suffering from an incurable non life threatening physical illness or severe deformity that makes living unbearable with a permanently compromised quality of life. As for the mentally ill, voluntary euthanasia should be an option only for those who still wish to end there life after agreeing to a 30-90 day stent in a psychiatric hospital with focused therapy and total cooperation with the program. Temporary euthanasia can also become a reality for all of these cases (see The Neuropreservation Initiative). Voluntary euthanasia for prisoners who have committed certain crimes (such as child molestation, rape, and murder) or are serving more than a 15 year prison sentence should also be given this option (see Project Model Prison)
ORGAN DONATION – Like in Austria, all American citizens should be automatically enrolled as organ donors to vastly reduce shortages for people who need organ transplants. It is a moral crime to allow transplantable organs to rot in the ground when they could be used to save countless lives. This measure should be in effect until advanced 3D printable organs becomes a technological reality and is financially feasible.
What do you all think so far? It’s just a rough draft
20 comments
I think ppl should be allowed to terminate there own lives for ANY reason. Stick “adult” and “mentally competent” in that sentence, too. Those terms need to be strictly defined, of course.
It isn’t OK for the state to control a woman’s uterus. Why is it OK for organs? Also, some religions groups think they need to keep all the parts to get to heaven.
You used the phrase “moral crime,” much to my disappointment. You might want to rephrase.
Me, personally, am very pro zero population growth. At the same time I want to minimize world hunger, pain, and suffering. So I try to sit on both sides of the fence. Needless to say, my underwear is ripped to shreds.
there >>> their
About euthanasia, I may agree with you, but if I’m gonna write law that is to be taken seriously by common folk, I gotta write it out like that.
As for the uterus, that is an abortion debate not a organ donation one. There is however uterus transplants. Our bodies belong to us only when we are alive. Once we die, we loose our sense of wants and belonging. When people want to live and are turning yellow waiting for something like a liver transplant, or a father of 5 dying because he never got a new heart, how is it not a moral crime to not be an organ doner when you die?
Me, I signed up to be gutted when I die. Everything that can be donated, will be.
Also religious fanatics who think they need there organs to rot into the ground in order to get into heaven need help. Most Christians I know are organ doners. We can’t let religion stand in the way of progress
This caught my eye and while I haven’t read it in full completeness, which I will do soon. I just had to through Momo’s (Mormons) under the bus, really fast. Not saying they are against organ donation or anything…just felt the need to go: *Picks up Momo and throws hard and quick under bus* I’m having a moment, can you tell? *evil laughter*
Haha Momos. I love it! Those Mor(money)s should be thrown under the temple “joins you in evil laughter”. I’m like opposite sex anointments or gtfo
LMAO@ opposite sex anointments or gtfo
ROTFLMAO@Mo(money)s perfect.
Little F*ckers
We are both doing the Monty Burn’s finger twiddle and saying “Excellent”
“….all American citizens should be automatically enrolled as organ donors…”.
I vehemently disagree. If my body belongs to me, shouldn’t I be the one who decides what happens to it? If I don’t want my body dissected and my organs harvested after my death, what right does the state have to impose their will on me?
I realize that my corpse’s spare parts can be used by living people who need them; but I want to be cremated intact. That’s my choice, and I sure as hell don’t want the government forcibly harvesting my body as a spare parts supply outlet.
I definatly understand what your saying and you do make good points. Maybe there can be a way to opt out. The way I see it, when we die, our self ownership dies with it. For me, when I die, I don’t care what they do with my body because I’d be as conscious and alive as a No.2 pencil. To me, having my organs harvested for the greater good of a broader society is no more scarier than having a tree cut down and making a table and chair out of the wood.
I know the organ donation thing scares a lot of people. My personal belief is that our bodies only belong to us as long as we are alive, than once we die, we loose our sense of belonging and wants.
If your body belongs to you, then you decide what to do with it whether you’re dead or alive.
Other people cannot do whatever they want with a lifeless corpse. I think it’s wrong to have sex with a dead body, mutilate it, or harvest a dead body for organs (unless the deceased has consented to be any of the afore mentioned acts).
Pulling body parts out of a dead person who did not specifically consent to being an organ donor is akin to rape. It’s a major form of disrespect and encroachment against the deceased. You cannot force your well intentioned beliefs onto others. If someone doesn’t want their body being sliced open like a frog in 7th grade science class, then their wishes need to be honored.
Good points. There may be an opt out plan that should happen for example: everyone should be automatically enrolled unless they opt out. I don’t think many people will opt out. Rape of a corpse is sick I agree. And we do have self ownership and wants, but those are only temporary. When you die, it’s impossible for you to be harmed. That’s living people stuff.
I agree with Morris and I think the system now should continue, where people have the choice of signing up to be an organ donor, if they wish – not that everyone would be automatically enrolled.
Plus, @wndoz Scientists are now able to grow organs in laboratories due to cloning techniques, so it’s not necessary to take them from the deceased.
Well, I noticed you had a positive interaction with the psychiatric system. That is not often the case so you’re lucky that you responded well to the program and the few methods of treatment provided. I would say this. If we were to roll with your paradigm, assuming the psychiatric system /always/ works, I would even say 30 to 90 days isn’t often enough to say that someone gave the system, the meds, and CBT a fair go. Again, you seemed to have responded well to their program within a period of a week and a half. For most, it is not that of a quick and dramatic turn around.
That also goes to show how much social exposure influences our mental/emotional health. But let me get back to the original point which is even, ninety days is insufficient for effective treatment time because, and the reasons are many, but number one being: most meds take a period of 4-6 weeks to reach max efficacy if the individual is even responsive. It can take a hell of a lot more time than 90 days to reach equilibrium.
Now, that answer was assuming that the psychiatric system is even an effective form of treatment which I strongly believe it is not. Most people are shuffled through psychwards like items on a conveyor belt and they are left worse for wear or get lost in the system. I don’t agree in the slightest that the psychiatric community should be in any way involved in making the decision whether somebody is eligible for or fits the necessary criteria for euthanasia, because more often than not, they push people to want to commit suicide more than help. And let me add that total cooperation to the program has proven to also be a detriment to countless. If I had totally “cooperated” I would still be locked in a psychward walking around as one of those zombies who get left behind, no voice, no advocate and ultimately forgotten and deemed impossible to treat.
As for euthanasia itself. I am undecided to be honest as to whether it would be a good thing. I don’t really have an opinion on it. Some days I truly favor it and wish it was available and other days I don’t feel like it would be a good thing. It’s a tough issue because there are so many people who would be dead right now if euthanasia had been available for them, but now, live happy and/or fulfilling lives.
I haven’t read the other comments, but just saw this one and agree 100%. It’s very difficult to gouge whether someone is really engaging with the system, and the idea of giving up on all hope of cure in that time is ridiculous. Psychiatric hospitals are very different in different place, different people respond differently, etc etc. You can’t base an idea like that on one person’s experience.
Re organ donation, while I think there should be more awareness of the register where I live (the UK) I don’t think it should be forced on people. For those who would be traumatised at the idea (for whatever reason) it would be cruel. Here they say they’ll ask family members what they think you’d have wanted and they search the database to see if you’ve registered – so they try to respect your wishes. But if a person’s family are horrified when they find a loved one on the register, they might choose not to use those organs… If they think their family will be disturbed by it. I don’t know how often that happens. I doubt it’s very often. But I think it’s the most compassionate method. A state controlling people’s bodies seems a dangerous precedence to me. How can anyone decide where it’s ‘fair’ to ignore their wishes, or where you should draw the line?
Can we combine both and let me get euthanized and harvest organs from me while i’m still alive?
That way my organs will be super fresh and i’ll get the sweet death i want. :>
If i was ever going to have my organs donated, I would be wanting to choose. My corpse wouldn’t sleep good until I knew it was going to the person/people I chose. I don’t want some asshole getting my organs!!!
Everyone should have the right to die, unless they want to die on impulse (should be a careful decision) or they seem incapable of making rational decisions. I am sure there is a massive grey area on what a ‘rational decision’ is. Actually if they seem incapable they should be helped and given advice, actually never mind; EVERYONE WHO IS SUICIDAL should be offered help and guidance, but if they really want to die we should let them. Let’s face it; nobody asked to be born, so why should anyone be forced to live? We had no choice in whether we wanted to be born or not. We should have the choice to die.
I’d sometimes rather have our corpses nourishing the Earth to be honest. I don’t think idiots (and I know ‘idiot’ is subjective) should have organs from decent people. But people should be able to make a decision if they would like to donate organs, and who they want them donated to, if they want.
I’ve never been to a psych ward. But you can google ‘psych hospital mistreatment’… I guess how you will be treated will be ‘luck of the draw’.
Youth in Asia shouldn’t be a crime, even though the Chinese only allow one baby per family.