- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Lawmakers propose letting Massachusetts prisoners donate organs for reduced sentences
Posted on 2/5/23 at 1:56 pm to Ross
Posted on 2/5/23 at 1:56 pm to Ross
From a medical ethics standpoint there are a lot of restrictions on medical research on "at risk" populations including prisoner populations. I can't imagine how this is ethically kosher in a similar vein.
0
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:00 pm to AbitaFan08
quote:
Say more words. How? What article or amendment of the constitution would you be referencing?
Eighth Amendment. Inmates are deemed to lack the capacity to consent to sexual intercourse with prison guards. Inmates are deemed to lack the capacity to consent to the vast majority of medical and scientific experiments. And in those situations, they aren't even being offered an incentive. It's a categorical bar due to the level of coercion that inmates are exposed to. Prisons already have a perverse incentive to lobby for increased criminalization as well as to hold inmates past their sentence due to the exception to the proscription against slavery in the Thirteenth Amendment. The incentive for the State to increase criminalization and sentence length in order to create a paradigm in which they can essentially farm the organs of undesirables would be extremely strong and utterly fricking dystopian.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:03 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Eighth Amendment. Inmates are deemed to lack the capacity to consent to sexual intercourse with prison guards.
Entirely irrelevant to the fact pattern at hand.
quote:
Inmates are deemed to lack the capacity to consent to the vast majority of medical and scientific experiments.
Nothing about this legislation regards an experiment of any kind.
quote:
Prisons already have a perverse incentive to lobby for increased criminalization as well as to hold inmates past their sentence due to the exception to the proscription against slavery in the Thirteenth Amendment. The incentive for the State to increase criminalization and sentence length in order to create a paradigm in which they can essentially farm the organs of undesirables would be extremely strong and utterly fricking dystopian
There is absolutely nothing about this legislation that increases criminalization or incentivizes it. So once again, irrelevant.
Again, please make a constitutional argument. Nothing delights me more than people who throw “it’s unconstitutional!” around when it’s abundantly clear they don’t know what’s in it.
This post was edited on 2/5/23 at 2:07 pm
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:05 pm to AbitaFan08
I think this type of legislation opens an obvious Pandora's box. It creates precedent to exchange organs for return value. This appears that it would basically legalize the organ trade.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:07 pm to Ross
With all the drugs and homosexual activity in prisons, is this really wise?
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:08 pm to Ross
I have no problem with this.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:08 pm to Rouge
quote:
I think this type of legislation opens an obvious Pandora's box. It creates precedent to exchange organs for return value. This appears that it would basically legalize the organ trade.
Now see? THAT is a reasonable and sound argument. And I don’t disagree with your premise.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:11 pm to AbitaFan08
I didn’t think my objections were unreasonable, did you have an opinion on them?
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:16 pm to Ross
No I think you made a sound argument. I just didn’t know I had to give everyone a pat on the back.
I think it’s an incredibly tricky subject. On one hand, I believe in the power of the punitive system to rehabilitate people, and by literally giving a part of yourself to another it can bring about serious change. And also, there is absolutely precedent for having your sentence reduced by doing good.
However, it’s hard to ignore the compulsory nature of the program, even if that’s not its intent (and I really don’t think it is meant to be that way.)
I’m just pointing out that “it’s unconstitutional!” is at best a weak argument.
I think it’s an incredibly tricky subject. On one hand, I believe in the power of the punitive system to rehabilitate people, and by literally giving a part of yourself to another it can bring about serious change. And also, there is absolutely precedent for having your sentence reduced by doing good.
However, it’s hard to ignore the compulsory nature of the program, even if that’s not its intent (and I really don’t think it is meant to be that way.)
I’m just pointing out that “it’s unconstitutional!” is at best a weak argument.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:17 pm to Ross
quote:
60 days to a year off their prison sentence
With this part being defined, I have no problem with this.
I say this because I completely support donating organs because my dad was in need of a kidney. I am all for saving other people's lives. If someone gets out 60 days earlier than they are supposed to for agreeing to donate their organs than so be it. I don't think saying in prison a year to 60 days more will change them either way.
What about anyone who goes to prison for a certain amount of time has to donate their organs?
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:21 pm to AbitaFan08
I promise I wasn’t trying to fish for a compliment, just trying to further a dialogue. Didn’t mean to come across that way. You just seemed like someone with interest in the subject and I was curious the depth of your thoughts on the matter.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:22 pm to Ross
quote:
I promise I wasn’t trying to fish for a compliment, just trying to further a dialogue. Didn’t mean to come across that way. You just seemed like someone with interest in the subject and I was curious the depth of your thoughts on the matter.
All good - I’m enjoying the conversation! Sorry if I came across harshly.
But I’ll warn you, the deeper you look into me the shallower you will find my knowledge and personality.
This post was edited on 2/5/23 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:26 pm to AbitaFan08
you’re good, I do think there’s something to be said about being willing to give up an organ showcasing that you want to do good by society and therefore aren’t a societal risk, but idk hard to come to grips with the idea this is a choice free of coercion given the circumstances Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:27 pm to Ross
quote:
but idk hard to come to grips with the idea this is a choice free of coercion given the circumstances
There'll be lots of ethical concerns about this. Will be hard to see this go through.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:31 pm to Ross
quote:
I do think there’s something to be said about being willing to give up an organ showcasing that you want to do good by society and therefore aren’t a societal risk, but idk hard to come to grips with the idea this is a choice free of coercion given the circumstances
I think that’s a fair concern. And it’s not something to be overlooked at all.
So perhaps it’s the process that needs to be closely monitored. I would advocate that anyone considering donating an organ to reduce a sentence should have to undergo some sort of counseling. And that could be in the legislation, I will be the first to admit I haven’t read it.
I think it’s a very interesting topic and I actually want to reach out to some folks in MA I know that work at NPOs helping the incarcerated to get their opinion as well.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:52 pm to Ross
Yup, just wait until you or a loved one is imprisoned because someone rich or a politician needs an organ and YOU MATCH.
Anyone who proposed, sponsored or supported this should be taken out back and shot AND their organs donated!
Anyone who proposed, sponsored or supported this should be taken out back and shot AND their organs donated!
Posted on 2/5/23 at 2:54 pm to armsdealer
quote:
Anyone who proposed, sponsored or supported this should be taken out back and shot AND their organs donated!
What an idiotically simple take on a complicated issue.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 3:00 pm to AbitaFan08
I think if you could hypothetically convince me that these people genuinely wanted to give up their organs out of some sense of societal good will, I’d say this is solid evidence they are not likely a societal risk and that should be taken into account with respect to their sentencing. However, I don’t know how you could ever truly convince me emotional manipulation/coercion to try and get themselves out of prison wasn’t a factor in the decision.
But I’m also the type of guy that thinks if you are looking at someone and think they can be let out of prison at the cost of an organ, that person probably shouldn’t be in prison to begin with. That’s probably as deep as I can get on the subject personally
But I’m also the type of guy that thinks if you are looking at someone and think they can be let out of prison at the cost of an organ, that person probably shouldn’t be in prison to begin with. That’s probably as deep as I can get on the subject personally
Posted on 2/5/23 at 3:07 pm to faraway
quote:
also think this reinforces the point that our prison system is more punitive than it is fostering of rehabilitation,
quote:
as it should be. screw rehabilitation
quote:
faraway
Jesus Christ.
Posted on 2/5/23 at 3:10 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
There’s zero chance he earnestly believes that. The idea behind locking people in a room and away from society and not just executing them on the spot after conviction is that eventually these people will “pay their societal debt” and emerge as functional human beings.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News