YOUR NATURAL RIGHT TO SELL PARTS OF YOUR OWN BODY

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

The other day, I saw a placard on a bus begging for handouts of free body parts.
Was it eyes or kidneys or something else ?

It is a violation of federal law to sell them.

As a supporter of laissez faire capitalism,
I object to the interference of any government into freedom of contract
for the sale thereof ( or of anything else ). SOME NERVE !
If it were possible to have degrees of ownership,
your own body wud be yours more than anything else (other than your life or spirit).

There is no jurisdiction to support such a law
(including the power to control interstate commerce).
The Founders wud have been aghast at so foul n egregious a usurpation of power.

If a citizen chooses to sell a kidney
and if he finds a buyer, that 's none of any government's business.
(If he offered a short-term lease on one, then maybe.)

David

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 965 • Replies: 14

No top replies

I agree, but I think that there needs to be some safeguards, so that people are not relieved of their parts against their will.

0 Replies

How do you feel about rental? For example, prostitution?

How do you answer the objection that in a "laissez-faire capitalist" environment, you might get situations where vulnerable people get exploited? (As already happens, actually).

How do you know what "the Founders" would have been aghast at? Are you in touch with them? Do you think it was right that many of them owned slaves?

0 Replies

Personally, I think that prostitution is a lousy way to make a living, but I think that it is nobody's business but the consenting adults.

Under our system, many people in "straight" jobs are exploited, but that is the nature of commerce amongst individuals. It is up to each of us to get the best deal that we can in life, and none of the government's business.

0 Replies

Not everybody is capable of getting the best deal they can, though, Phoenix, hence minimum wage and labour standards. It still doesn't stop exploitation and intimidation of employees by employers, but there are few basics that need to be in place.

0 Replies

Mame- I don't object to the very basics........they are already in place, and as far as I am concerned, a given. But beyond that, there is plenty of exploitation that goes on in the workplace, in big ways and small. As far as I am concerned, no one is forced to stay at a job that he finds untenable. The person can confront the problems, and attempt to negotiate a better situation, be it monetary, enviromental, interpersonal, or anything else. If that fails, he is free to leave the job.

The problem is that leaving often brings with it other difficulties. As adults it is up to each one of us to make the decision about what might be the best of two or more negative alternatives.

0 Replies

I once considered prostitution... squinney encouraged... citing that it would be fun to see how I made it on 50.00 a month...

0 Replies

My understanding of why there are laws against it is that only the poor would need to sell and only the rich could afford to buy. This does happen in other countries.

We currently have a donor list and recipient list that balances that out so that the rich person that just found out they need a kidney can't jump ahead of a thousand people and be first just because they have money. I'm sure there are instances of that happening, but at least there is a system to try to prevent it.

Maybe if there was a way to sell and have it go t the next person on the list rather than individuals brokering... I dunno. Not sure I want the government in on that either.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

I agree, but I think that there needs to be some safeguards,
so that people are not relieved of their parts against their will.

I suspect that 's the reason that the statute was enacted,
but I do not believe that government was ever granted this authority.

Government STOLE the authority to do this.

David

0 Replies

contrex wrote:

Quote:

How do you feel about rental? For example, prostitution?

I dispute that any jurisdiction exists to interfere
with ladies of the evening rendering their services.
I support freedom of both sides to such a contract.

Quote:

How do you answer the objection that in a "laissez-faire capitalist"
environment, you might get situations where vulnerable people get exploited?
(As already happens, actually).

Everyone has freedom of contract.
He or she can use it as he or she sees fit.
That is none of the government 's business,
and government was not created to prevent "exploitation".
It was created to defend people from the VIOLATION OF THEIR RIGHTS,
against their will, e.g., by robbery.

Quote:

How do you know what "the Founders" would have been aghast at?

We know their thoughts by reading their writings.

Quote:

Are you in touch with them?

Of course I am; I need only read what thay wrote.

Quote:

Do you think it was right that many of them owned slaves?

Off topic.

David

0 Replies

Mame wrote:

Not everybody is capable of getting the best deal they can, though, Phoenix, hence minimum wage and labour standards. It still doesn't stop exploitation and intimidation of employees by employers, but there are few basics that need to be in place.

Government in America was not created
to get the best deal for anyone. Nowhere was it granted authority
to do that. The Founders of government, who wrote the social contract
were not concerned with "exploitation" and gave no power to government
to address that concept.

Therefore, if government exercises any authority in that area,
it is STOLEN authority, by usurpation, like a bank teller stealing from your account.

David

0 Replies

omsickdavid wrote:

Government in America was not created

spontaneous generation?

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

My understanding of why there are laws against it is that only the poor would need to sell and only the rich could afford to buy. This does happen in other countries.

We currently have a donor list and recipient list that balances that out so that the rich person that just found out they need a kidney can't jump ahead of a thousand people and be first just because they have money. I'm sure there are instances of that happening, but at least there is a system to try to prevent it.

Maybe if there was a way to sell and have it go t the next person on the list rather than individuals brokering... I dunno. Not sure I want the government in on that either.

If we meet, and u offer me your kidney for a million $$,
and I accept the offer, we are within our natural rights,
but (if I remember acccurately) there is a 30 year federal prison term
to intimidate us against contracting thusly.

Government was not created to screw us out of our rights.

If the poor have problems with this,
it still does not void OUR natural rights to contract to sell.

David

YOUR NATURAL RIGHT TO SELL PARTS OF YOUR OWN BODY

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know