On 19/02/2021 19:03, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:
On 19/02/2021 18:39, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation.Â* Why?Â* Why not just make it mandatory?Â* You're dead, you
don't need those organs.Â* Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

not just thinking

https://www.organdonationscotland.or...caAp6cEALw_wcB

speaking as someone who has the liver of a 20 odd year old boy racer if
they don't want to live I do ......

On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

Never? Please back that.

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

On 20/02/2021 03:05, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote

For being too stupid to use contraception

Yet you seen to be anti-pill of the type to prevent embryo
implantation?

Thats not contraception, thats one form of abortion.

So the contraceptive pill is considered by you as a form of abortion?

Nope.

Then you've just contradicted yourself. Many contraceptive pills allow
for the fertilisation of the egg to form your living embryo but then
prevent implantation.

It's just like the morning after pill, where implantation is prevented.

That's novel.

Nope, dope.

It's seems you're not so against abortion as a few posts ago. Do make
up your mind.

On 19/02/2021 20:57, NY wrote:
Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation.Â* Why?Â* Why not just make it mandatory?Â* You're dead, you
don't need those organs.Â* Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Organ donation should still be optional, but with two provisos:

- the assumption is that unless you are on record as saying no, it
should be presumed that you agree to donate

- your next of kin has no right to countermand your wishes and withhold
their permission even though you have said that you want to donate:
their permission should not even be sought

Your next of kin are the ones that have to live the rest of their lives
with the pictures in their head and the upset that an incomplete body
was buried. Many will be fine with that, taking solace in the good that
came from it, others will not. Family should always have the final say
.... *UNLESS* you have made a firm and documented choice beforehand -
then they should not be able to override it. Where your consent has only
been assumed, family *must* retain the final say.

On 19/02/2021 22:22, micky wrote:
In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:39:42 -0000, "Commander
Kinsey" wrote:

Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you don't need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork? Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Not only that, someone should go through all the caskets removing any
jewelry that might have been foolishly buried with you or your fellow
dead poeple.

In my mother-in-law's case, that was supposed to happen, but didn't. My
wife had always said that she wasn't bothered about anything else, but
she wanted her parents rings when they died. She has her father's, but
the undertaker made a mistake, didn't record a note to remove the rings
and buried her mother's with her.

On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

Never? Please back that.

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?

Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women. And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality. A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist. As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision. And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy? The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.

--
Joel Crump

On 2/20/2021 9:57 AM, Joel wrote:
Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women. And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality. A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist. As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision. And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy? The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.


I surely don't condone abortion as a method of BC, but even when many
take precautions, it happens and of course, the rape issue. Easier to
keep it legal, then allow the complacent to argue point of life.

Mario wrote
Rod Speed wrote

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other
because that is more convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after
she was beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then
having to endure 9 months of the trauma she never asked for?

Very few abortions are after those events. They are almost all
because the woman has been too stupid to use contraception.

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass
judgement, especially when you'll never have that experience.

Just as true of the vast bulk that choose to have an abortion.

Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote

For being too stupid to use contraception

Yet you seen to be anti-pill of the type to prevent embryo
implantation?

Thats not contraception, thats one form of abortion.

So the contraceptive pill is considered by you as a form of abortion?

Nope.

Then you've just contradicted yourself.

Nope.

Many contraceptive pills allow for the fertilisation of the egg to form
your living embryo but then prevent implantation.

In fact most of them prevent fertilisation of
the egg in the first place or the production
of eggs where they can be fertilised.

It's just like the morning after pill, where implantation is prevented.

Most of them are in fact nothing like that.

That's novel.

Nope, dope.

It's seems you're not so against abortion as a few posts ago.

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, again.

Do make up your mind.

I haven't changed my mind on that issue.

On 2/19/2021 1:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:58:09 -0000, Snit wrote:

On Feb 19, 2021 at 11:54:45 AM MST, "Joel" wrote
:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote:

Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for
organ donation.* Why?* Why not just make it mandatory?* You're dead,
you don't need those organs.* Why waste the doctor's time on
paperwork?* Why murder someone after your death who could have been
saved by your body parts? And no I don’t care if you have some crazy
religion.


At least here in the U.S., they attempt to make contact with the
relatives of the dying person, before transplanting organs solely
based on the individual's identification card, which expresses that he
or she is an organ donor.* My driver's license indicates that i would
donate organs, but I'm pretty sure they'd still ask my family about it
if they were able to contact them.


Here in the US many people want body autonomy for their DEAD body, but
want to
deny it to living women.

Don't organs have to be of a similar size, so same sex and same age?

They have to be close to the same size of the organ recipient,
especially, the veins that connect the donated organ to the recipient.

--
Maggie

On 2/19/2021 3:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:


"Snit" wrote in message
...
Rod Speed wrote:


"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Feb 19, 2021 at 12:06:01 PM MST, ""Rod Speed"" wrote
:



"Snit" wrote in message
...
On Feb 19, 2021 at 11:54:45 AM MST, "Joel" wrote
:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote:

Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for
organ
donation.Â* Why?Â* Why not just make it mandatory?Â* You're dead, you
don't need those organs.Â* Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by
your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.


At least here in the U.S., they attempt to make contact with the
relatives of the dying person, before transplanting organs solely
based on the individual's identification card, which expresses
that he
or she is an organ donor.Â* My driver's license indicates that i
would
donate organs, but I'm pretty sure they'd still ask my family
about it
if they were able to contact them.

Here in the US many people want body autonomy for their DEAD body,
but
want to deny it to living women.

Because abortion is murder.

Do you think so even in the case of rape and incest?

Yep, corse it is.

If the mother's life is at stake?

It never is when premature birth isnt the alternative.

Never? Please back that.

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?


No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.


I'm surprised. Something we agree on.

--
Maggie

Steve Walker wrote
NY wrote
Commander Kinsey wrote

Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you don't
need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork? Why
murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your body
parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Organ donation should still be optional, but with two provisos:

- the assumption is that unless you are on record as saying no, it should
be presumed that you agree to donate

- your next of kin has no right to countermand your wishes and withhold
their permission even though you have said that you want to donate: their
permission should not even be sought

Your next of kin are the ones that have to live the rest of their lives
with the pictures in their head and the upset that an incomplete body was
buried.

Thats their problem. They should have no say on what happens.

And buried corpses are a stupid way of dealing with the body anyway.

Many will be fine with that, taking solace in the good that came from it,
others will not.

Stiff **** for them.

Family should always have the final say

Wrong.

... *UNLESS* you have made a firm and documented choice beforehand - then
they should not be able to override it. Where your consent has only been
assumed, family *must* retain the final say.

Wrong.

On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 03:38:32 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

03:38 in Australia? Yet again? And you've been up and trolling for about
half an hour already, you miserable quarrelsome senile pest! LOL

--
FredXX to Rodent Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

"Mario" wrote in message
...
On 2/20/2021 9:57 AM, Joel wrote:
Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women. And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality. A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist. As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision. And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy? The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.


I surely don't condone abortion as a method of BC, but even when many take
precautions, it happens and of course, the rape issue. Easier to keep it
legal, then allow the complacent to argue point of life.

Pity about all the deliberate murders that happen that way.

On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 03:31:46 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Very few abortions are after those events.

YOU are an abortion in your own right, you abnormal quarrelsome senile pest!

--
"Who or What is Rod Speed?
Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod Speed
is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered he can
enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the big, hard
man" on the InterNet."
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 20/02/2021 16:43, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote

For being too stupid to use contraception

Yet you seen to be anti-pill of the type to prevent embryo
implantation?

Thats not contraception, thats one form of abortion.

So the contraceptive pill is considered by you as a form of abortion?

Nope.

Then you've just contradicted yourself.

Nope.

Many contraceptive pills allow for the fertilisation of the egg to
form your living embryo but then prevent implantation.

In fact most of them prevent fertilisation of
the egg in the first place or the production
of eggs where they can be fertilised.

It's just like the morning after pill, where implantation is prevented.

Most of them are in fact nothing like that.

Most of them are everything like that. To think otherwise is blatant
denial. The most successful is the combined pill, which has the effect
of inhibiting implantation.

That's novel.

Nope, dope.

It's seems you're not so against abortion as a few posts ago.

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, again.

Do make up your mind.

I haven't changed my mind on that issue.

So you don't approve of IUDs either?

On 20/02/2021 14:57, Joel wrote:
Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women. And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality. A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist.

You were doing well up to this point. It's also sexist to ignore the
father's opinion.

As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision.

That's because as a father he doesn't have any rights for his unborn child.

And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy? The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.

Back to common sense.

On 20/02/2021 17:00, Rod Speed wrote:


"Mario" wrote in message
...
On 2/20/2021 9:57 AM, Joel wrote:
Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's
baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women.Â* And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality.Â* A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist.Â* As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision.Â* And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy?Â* The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.


I surely don't condone abortion as a method of BC, but even when many
take precautions, it happens and of course, the rape issue. Easier to
keep it legal, then allow the complacent to argue point of life.

Pity about all the deliberate murders that happen that way.

Some of us don't call using IUDs and the like murder.

Let every child be a wanted child.

On 02/20/2021 01:58 AM, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:
On 19/02/2021 19:03, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:
On 19/02/2021 18:39, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you
don't need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

not just thinking

https://www.organdonationscotland.or...caAp6cEALw_wcB

speaking as someone who has the liver of a 20 odd year old boy racer if
they don't want to live I do ......

Motorcycle riders are sometimes called organ donors but anybody waiting
for my spare parts has had a hell of a long wait.

On 20/02/2021 16:31, Rod Speed wrote:
Mario wrote
Rod Speed wrote

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Very few abortions are after those events. They are almost all because
the woman has been too stupid to use contraception.

Are you advocating all women should have mandatory birth control? Some
choose to abstain or are good catholics.

You're not a good catholic are you?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

Just as true of the vast bulk that choose to have an abortion.

That doesn't make sense.

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 10:43:47 -0600, Muggles, another brain dead,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blathered again:


They have to be close to the same size of the organ recipient,
especially, the veins that connect the donated organ to the recipient.

It will be difficult to find an asshole of the size both of you assholes
are! BG

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 18:28:28 -0000, rbowman wrote:

On 02/20/2021 01:58 AM, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:
On 19/02/2021 19:03, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:
On 19/02/2021 18:39, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you
don't need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

not just thinking

https://www.organdonationscotland.or...caAp6cEALw_wcB

speaking as someone who has the liver of a 20 odd year old boy racer if
they don't want to live I do ......

Motorcycle riders are sometimes called organ donors but anybody waiting
for my spare parts has had a hell of a long wait.

You know what ****es me off? A car in a legally unroadworthy state cannot drive on the road without you getting in trouble, but it's still 10 times safer than a motorbike.

Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote

For being too stupid to use contraception

Yet you seen to be anti-pill of the type to prevent embryo
implantation?

Thats not contraception, thats one form of abortion.

So the contraceptive pill is considered by you as a form of abortion?

Nope.

Then you've just contradicted yourself.

Nope.

Many contraceptive pills allow for the fertilisation of the egg to form
your living embryo but then prevent implantation.

In fact most of them prevent fertilisation of
the egg in the first place or the production
of eggs where they can be fertilised.

It's just like the morning after pill, where implantation is prevented.

Most of them are in fact nothing like that.

Most of them are everything like that.

BULL****.

To think otherwise is blatant denial.

More bull****.

The most successful is the combined pill, which has the effect of
inhibiting implantation.

Wrong, as always.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combin...sm_of_acti on

That's novel.

Nope, dope.

It's seems you're not so against abortion as a few posts ago.

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, again.

Do make up your mind.

I haven't changed my mind on that issue.

So you don't approve of IUDs either?

Never said that or anything like that, ****wit.

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 08:58:12 -0000, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:

On 19/02/2021 19:03, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:
On 19/02/2021 18:39, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you
don't need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

not just thinking

https://www.organdonationscotland.or...caAp6cEALw_wcB

speaking as someone who has the liver of a 20 odd year old boy racer if
they don't want to live I do ......

I went to school with one, the twit had a fight with a telegraph pole. But he didn't reach 20. Well he probably reached 20mph, but not 20 years old :-)

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:37:30 -0000, Steve Walker wrote:

On 19/02/2021 20:57, NY wrote:
Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news
Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you
don't need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork?
Why murder someone after your death who could have been saved by your
body parts? And no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Organ donation should still be optional, but with two provisos:

- the assumption is that unless you are on record as saying no, it
should be presumed that you agree to donate

- your next of kin has no right to countermand your wishes and withhold
their permission even though you have said that you want to donate:
their permission should not even be sought

Your next of kin are the ones that have to live the rest of their lives
with the pictures in their head and the upset that an incomplete body
was buried. Many will be fine with that, taking solace in the good that
came from it, others will not. Family should always have the final say
... *UNLESS* you have made a firm and documented choice beforehand -
then they should not be able to override it. Where your consent has only
been assumed, family *must* retain the final say.

You make me sick. Having a "proper burial" is a million times less important than the life that could have been saved. You're condoning murder..

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 08:55:11 -0000, Jimmy Stewart ... wrote:

On 19/02/2021 21:00, Tim+ wrote:
NY wrote:
Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you don't
need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork? Why murder
someone after your death who could have been saved by your body parts? And
no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Organ donation should still be optional, but with two provisos:

- the assumption is that unless you are on record as saying no, it should be
presumed that you agree to donate

- your next of kin has no right to countermand your wishes and withhold
their permission even though you have said that you want to donate: their
permission should not even be sought



Legally they have all the rights. Once youre dead (or brain dead) you have
no rights.

Tim

what about animal organ transplants ? ...

Nobody seems to agree on what animal rights are. You can eat a cow, but if you kill a mouse or rat the wrong way it's against the law.

On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:38:38 -0000, Tim+ wrote:

NY wrote:
"Tim+" wrote in message
...
NY wrote:
Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you don't
need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork? Why
murder
someone after your death who could have been saved by your body parts?
And
no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Organ donation should still be optional, but with two provisos:

- the assumption is that unless you are on record as saying no, it should
be
presumed that you agree to donate

- your next of kin has no right to countermand your wishes and withhold
their permission even though you have said that you want to donate: their
permission should not even be sought



Legally they have all the rights. Once youre dead (or brain dead) you
have
no rights.

But you have the right to determine what will happen to your body in the
same way that a will directs how you want your money to be distributed.

Um, no you dont. You can express your wishes to your next of kin about
what happens to your body but once youre brain dead, but your next of kin
dont have to follow those wishes. They are empowered to make decisions
about you when you are no longer able to do so.

What backwards way first country do you live in? If you wrote something before you were brain dead, that overrides everything.

Many a kidney has gone to the crematorium that the owner wanted to be
donated but the next of kin declined.

The next of kin should be killed to harvest their kidneys, see how they like that.

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 20/02/2021 17:00, Rod Speed wrote:


"Mario" wrote in message
...
On 2/20/2021 9:57 AM, Joel wrote:
Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's
baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women. And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality. A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist. As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision. And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy? The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.


I surely don't condone abortion as a method of BC, but even when many
take precautions, it happens and of course, the rape issue. Easier to
keep it legal, then allow the complacent to argue point of life.

Pity about all the deliberate murders that happen that way.

Some of us don't call using IUDs and the like murder.

I dont either, because they dont kill the
fertilised egg or prevent implantation either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrau...vice#Mechanism

Let every child be a wanted child.

On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:32:55 -0000, Snit wrote:

On Feb 19, 2021 at 2:00:50 PM MST, "Tim+" wrote
:

NY wrote:
Commander Kinsey" wrote in message
news Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for organ
donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead, you don't
need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on paperwork? Why murder
someone after your death who could have been saved by your body parts? And
no I dont care if you have some crazy religion.

Organ donation should still be optional, but with two provisos:

- the assumption is that unless you are on record as saying no, it should be
presumed that you agree to donate

- your next of kin has no right to countermand your wishes and withhold
their permission even though you have said that you want to donate: their
permission should not even be sought



Legally they have all the rights. Once youre dead (or brain dead) you have
no rights.

Tim

I think even Republicans should have rights.

You're too soft. I can imagine someone coming at you with a knife, and instead of shooting them, you'd try to reason with them.

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 16:43:47 -0000, Muggles wrote:

On 2/19/2021 1:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 18:58:09 -0000, Snit wrote:

On Feb 19, 2021 at 11:54:45 AM MST, "Joel" wrote
:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote:

Scotland and Canada are (thinking of) changing to "opt out" for
organ donation. Why? Why not just make it mandatory? You're dead,
you don't need those organs. Why waste the doctor's time on
paperwork? Why murder someone after your death who could have been
saved by your body parts? And no I don’t care if you have some crazy
religion.


At least here in the U.S., they attempt to make contact with the
relatives of the dying person, before transplanting organs solely
based on the individual's identification card, which expresses that he
or she is an organ donor. My driver's license indicates that i would
donate organs, but I'm pretty sure they'd still ask my family about it
if they were able to contact them.


Here in the US many people want body autonomy for their DEAD body, but
want to
deny it to living women.

Don't organs have to be of a similar size, so same sex and same age?

They have to be close to the same size of the organ recipient,
especially, the veins that connect the donated organ to the recipient.

Hence an average man cannot donate an organ to an average woman anyway.

Who cares about religious beliefs? Not donating is equivalent to murder, religious folk cannot kill in the name of their religion.


On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 20:31:54 -0000, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

You cannot do compulsory while respecting the beliefs of others. Yes they
can make it opt out, I was under the impression it already was in England.
Brian

On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 11:28:28 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

Motorcycle riders are sometimes called organ donors but anybody waiting
for my spare parts has had a hell of a long wait.

Wow! COOOOL! snicker

Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Mario wrote
Rod Speed wrote

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Very few abortions are after those events. They are almost all because
the woman has been too stupid to use contraception.

Are you advocating all women should have mandatory birth control?

Nope, that those who dont want to become pregnant
should use contraception instead of having an abortion.

Some choose to abstain

They are free to do that.

or are good catholics.

Stupid catholics, actually.

You're not a good catholic are you?

Not any sort of catholic and dont believe in any stupid god either.

Or even a smart god or devil either.

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

Just as true of the vast bulk that choose to have an abortion.

That doesn't make sense.

Wrong, as always.

On Feb 20, 2021 at 7:57:20 AM MST, "Joel" wrote
:

Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women. And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality. A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist. As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision. And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy? The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.

Very well said.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On 2/20/2021 12:50 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 20 Feb 2021 16:43:47 -0000, Muggles wrote:

On 2/19/2021 1:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:

Don't organs have to be of a similar size, so same sex and same age?

They have to be close to the same size of the organ recipient,
especially, the veins that connect the donated organ to the recipient.

Hence an average man cannot donate an organ to an average woman anyway.

The gender of the person donating doesn't matter. What does matter if
the organ is viable and is a match to the recipient.

--
Maggie

On 20/02/2021 18:55, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Mario wrote
Rod Speed wrote

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she
was beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure
9 months of the trauma she never asked for?

Very few abortions are after those events. They are almost all
because the woman has been too stupid to use contraception.

Are you advocating all women should have mandatory birth control?

Nope, that those who dont want to become pregnant
should use contraception instead of having an abortion.

Some choose to abstain

They are free to do that.

And currently free to abort the pregnancy in the case of rape. Hurray.

or are good catholics.

Stupid catholics, actually.

Maybe, but that comes from choice. You're free to be an arsehole too and
inflict your fanatical views on others like "T i m".

You're not a good catholic are you?

Not any sort of catholic and dont believe in any stupid god either.

Or even a smart god or devil either.

So you accept that the few abortions resulting from rape are acceptable
then?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass
judgement, especially when you'll never have that experience.

Just as true of the vast bulk that choose to have an abortion.

That doesn't make sense.

Wrong, as always.

There is a difference between sitting in an armchair and the victim of a
rape having to bring up a child they didn't want.

You seem to think they are one and the same and anyone suggesting
otherwise is wrong in your eyes.

On 20/02/2021 18:49, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 20/02/2021 17:00, Rod Speed wrote:


"Mario" wrote in message
...
On 2/20/2021 9:57 AM, Joel wrote:
Bob F wrote:
On 2/20/2021 3:39 AM, Mario wrote:
On 2/19/2021 4:49 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she
was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass
judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

How do these nuts think about having to bring their wife's
rapist's baby
to term? Will they happily accept them as their own?


Antiabortion people (not "pro-life", which is a self-serving slogan
and not a real policy) don't really care about women.Â* And I know, a
lot of them are women, but not ones who comprehend the idea of
equality.Â* A rape victim has every right to bear a child produced from
rape, if they so choose, but to deny them the choice to abort it is
unbelievably sexist.Â* As Mario said, a man will never have to face
that decision.Â* And if you have an "exception" to an abortion ban for
victims of rape, how will they prove rape was the cause of the
pregnancy?Â* The only solution is to keep abortion legal in general.


I surely don't condone abortion as a method of BC, but even when
many take precautions, it happens and of course, the rape issue.
Easier to keep it legal, then allow the complacent to argue point of
life.

Pity about all the deliberate murders that happen that way.

Some of us don't call using IUDs and the like murder.

I dont either, because they dont kill the
fertilised egg or prevent implantation either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrau...vice#Mechanism

Quite, so using your own link, "Copper can also alter the endometrial
lining, but studies show that while this alteration can prevent
implantation of a fertilized egg".


Let every child be a wanted child.

On 20/02/2021 18:44, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote

For being too stupid to use contraception

Yet you seen to be anti-pill of the type to prevent embryo
implantation?

Thats not contraception, thats one form of abortion.

So the contraceptive pill is considered by you as a form of abortion?

Nope.

Then you've just contradicted yourself.

Nope.

Many contraceptive pills allow for the fertilisation of the egg to
form your living embryo but then prevent implantation.

In fact most of them prevent fertilisation of
the egg in the first place or the production
of eggs where they can be fertilised.

It's just like the morning after pill, where implantation is prevented.

Most of them are in fact nothing like that.

Most of them are everything like that.

BULL****.

To think otherwise is blatant denial.

More bull****.

The most successful is the combined pill, which has the effect of
inhibiting implantation.

Wrong, as always.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combin...sm_of_acti on

There are references that the estrogens in the combined pill to inhibit
implantation.

From the manufacturer of the most popular UK contraceptive pill:
https://www.pharmacy2u.co.uk/cerazette.html

Finally Cerazette affects the quality of the lining of the womb so
making successful implantation of a fertilised egg less likely.

Combined pills provide several stages of protection against pregnancy.
Something you will have to deal with.

That's novel.

Nope, dope.

It's seems you're not so against abortion as a few posts ago.

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, again.

Do make up your mind.

I haven't changed my mind on that issue.

So you don't approve of IUDs either?

Never said that or anything like that, ****wit.

Yet, as per a link you provided, "Copper can also alter the endometrial
lining, but studies show that while this alteration can prevent
implantation of a fertilized egg".

Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Mario wrote
Rod Speed wrote

And are you willing to take care of the unwanted babies?

No need, there is a desperate shortage of brats
for adoption in the modern first and second world.

It babies who cannot be taken care of by parents?

See above.

And who do you think should have more rights: a woman or a fetus?

Neither have any right to murder the other because that is more
convenient for them.

Who are you to tell a woman what to do with her body if/after she was
beaten, raped, tortured or who knows what, then having to endure 9
months of the trauma she never asked for?

Very few abortions are after those events. They are almost all because
the woman has been too stupid to use contraception.

Are you advocating all women should have mandatory birth control?

Nope, that those who dont want to become pregnant
should use contraception instead of having an abortion.

Some choose to abstain

They are free to do that.

And currently free to abort the pregnancy in the case of rape. Hurray.

And free to abort the pregnancy when they are too stupid to use
contraception.

or are good catholics.

Stupid catholics, actually.

Maybe,

No maybe about it.

reams of your puerile **** flushed where it belongs

You're not a good catholic are you?

Not any sort of catholic and dont believe in any stupid god either.

Or even a smart god or devil either.

So you accept that the few abortions resulting from rape are acceptable
then?

Never said that, its still murder.

Easy for you to sit in your mighty computer chair ans pass judgement,
especially when you'll never have that experience.

Just as true of the vast bulk that choose to have an abortion.

That doesn't make sense.

Wrong, as always.

There is a difference between sitting in an armchair and the victim of a
rape having to bring up a child they didn't want.

They dont have to bring it up, they are free to put it up for adoption
with hordes who want to adopt a newborn in the modern first and
second world, far more than are put up for adoption.

You seem to think they are one and the same

Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, as always.