NationStates Jolt Archive

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

Not just for shits and giggles, no... but for a medical reason? Sure.

Probably. Although it depends on the quality of life I'd have and how long I'd live after the transplant/transfusion - if I'd have a considerably improved quality of life and live for some time afterwards, then yes, I'd go for it. If I had a slightly improved quality of life for a couple of years, I'd probably say no. Mind you, if that were the case I'd be low down on the waiting list anyway, so it'd be a moot point.

Of course. If my life depends on something like a new organ, I´m accepting.

Also I´ve donated blood, so I would be ok with receiving blood.

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

of course i would (even if i can imagine circumstances where i would refuse either)

why wouldnt you?

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

Who is to say the spleen I would get isn't as good as my current spleen?

I bet there are some superior spleens out there.

of course i would (even if i can imagine circumstances where i would refuse either)

why wouldnt you?

I wouldn't be able to stand having some one elses organ or there blood . As wierd as It sounds my bloods mean to much for me to have It diluted with some one elses.

of course i would (even if i can imagine circumstances where i would refuse either)

why wouldnt you?

Only logical reason I can think of - has to do with issues of disease and/or rejection. Still, if the situation is life or death, I'm not sure how much either of those would matter. Maybe if it was only going to extend my life by a week, and I'd be in terrible pain the whole time... well, then I wouldn't. (Unless I really needed that week to get something finished before I popped my clogs...)

can't imagine why ever not.

Who is to say the spleen I would get isn't as good as my current spleen?

I bet there are some superior spleens out there.

Its not that Its just I don't want anyones organs regardless of how much I need It. I wouldn't care If It were superior.

I wouldn't be able to stand having some one elses organ or there blood . As wierd as It sounds my bloods mean to much for me to have It diluted with some one elses.

How would you know? You think you can feel the difference between their plasma and your own?

Of course - it's also possible you had blood transfused before you even remember...

While the idea of transplant is slightly icky to my mind, I think it is a quite substantially better option than death, which seems to be the alternative if the transplant is "necessary":rolleyes:

Its not that Its just I don't want anyones organs regardless of how much I need It. I wouldn't care If It were superior.

Faced with an actual choice between a debilitating and painful slow death... and a fresher start with a new organ... I wonder how strongly you'd stand by such a policy.

I wouldn't be able to stand having some one elses organ or there blood . As wierd as It sounds my bloods mean to much for me to have It diluted with some one elses.

Lol, blood is nothing special. You must be afraid of needles, since you probabily never received or donated blood in your life.

I wouldn't be able to stand having some one elses organ or there blood . As wierd as It sounds my bloods mean to much for me to have It diluted with some one elses.

so you would rather die of something easily treatable because you would refuse to mix your blood?

so you would rather die of something easily treatable because you would refuse to mix your blood?

That's the bit that's stumping me... religious fear of blood... or racist 'purity' of blood, are the only things that explain (to me) this fear of 'mixing blood'.

Maybe there is another good reason, but I can't think of one.

Only logical reason I can think of - has to do with issues of disease and/or rejection. Still, if the situation is life or death, I'm not sure how much either of those would matter. Maybe if it was only going to extend my life by a week, and I'd be in terrible pain the whole time... well, then I wouldn't. (Unless I really needed that week to get something finished before I popped my clogs...)

yeah that kind of thing

when my father in law had heart bypass surgery he refused a last transfusion before he went home because he figured he'd be OK without it and there is no sense taking unnecessary risks with blood.

so you would rather die of something easily treatable because you would refuse to mix your blood?

Yes , My wierd morales just wouldn't allow me to do It.

How would you know? You think you can feel the difference between their plasma and your own?

Of course - it's also possible you had blood transfused before you even remember...

Well I would feel alot different In my mind and that would make me feel different overall. I will ask my parents now If I ever had a blood transfusion..
But still I would reject medical care If I had to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant.

Yes , My wierd morales just wouldn't allow me to do It.

How did 'morals' get involved?

How is a blood transfusion not 'moral'?

Well I would feel alot different In my mind and that would make me feel different overall. I will ask my parents now If I ever had a blood transfusion..
But still I would reject medical care If I had to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant.

You say you would feel different in your mind, and that would make you feel different overall. Logically then, you realise that your body couldn't 'feel the difference. So - it all comes down to mental attitude.

The question is, then - what is it about the idea of someone else's blood in your veins, that freaks you out?

That's the bit that's stumping me... religious fear of blood... or racist 'purity' of blood, are the only things that explain (to me) this fear of 'mixing blood'.

Maybe there is another good reason, but I can't think of one.

Well I like my blood and I guess I'd like to keep It purely consisted of my own .. Anything racial or religous wouldn't come into the decision.

Yes , My wierd morales just wouldn't allow me to do It.

thats very sad.

perhaps you should talk to a local jehovas witnesses to ask if there is a way to start banking your own blood now in case you need it in an emergency

thats very sad.

perhaps you should talk to a local jehovas witnesses to ask if there is a way to start banking your own blood now in case you need it in an emergency

I'm not a Jehovah's witness I just don't want anyone elses blood or organs , Call It what you want but I'm happy with that decision.

Well I like my blood and I guess I'd like to keep It purely consisted of my own .. Anything racial or religous wouldn't come into the decision.

Do you even know where blood comes from?

You keep talking about thinks like purity... and I don't see how that logically connects with the reality of blood - it ONLY makes sense in the context of ideas of racial or religious 'purity'.

You say you would feel different in your mind, and that would make you feel different overall. Logically then, you realise that your body couldn't 'feel the difference. So - it all comes down to mental attitude.

The question is, then - what is it about the idea of someone else's blood in your veins, that freaks you out?

Well I would hate having some one elses blood. I would never now If It feels different and I won't ever try It.

How did 'morals' get involved?

How is a blood transfusion not 'moral'?

I guess calling It morales was perhaps the wrong word but I just don't believe in using other peoples organs and blood .the thought of taking and using another persons organ ....

Well I would hate having some one elses blood. I would never now If It feels different and I won't ever try It.

Hahaha your ignorance amuses me.

Anyway, if you ever get into an accident or need a transplant, you dont deserve to receive anything anyway. Better give it to someone who deserves it.

Well I would hate having some one elses blood. I would never now If It feels different and I won't ever try It.

And my point is - you wouldn't know. If you were unconscious at the time (and there were no rejection issues), someone could be transfusing blood into you every day... and you'd be none the wiser.

The government could be transfusing a pint into you (and a pint of your 'own' out, obviously) each time you sleep, and you'd never be aware.

So - anything you have about blood transfusion, or organ transplanting, is in your head.

And my point is - you wouldn't know. If you were unconscious at the time (and there were no rejection issues), someone could be transfusing blood into you every day... and you'd be none the wiser.

The government could be transfusing a pint into you (and a pint of your 'own' out, obviously) each time you sleep, and you'd never be aware.

So - anything you have about blood transfusion, or organ transplanting, is in your head.

The thought of people stealing my blood Is ridiculous , Regardless of the situation I would never want some ones blood or organs..

I guess calling It morales was perhaps the wrong word but I just don't believe in using other peoples organs and blood .the thought of taking and using another persons organ ....

You don't 'believe' in it?

How is it a matter of belief?

What you describe is a fear - although not (necessarily) an unreasonable one... there are risks... but you don't seem to be talking about safety or risk...

What is wrong with having another person's organs inside you? I am totally unconscious of my heart... so long as it beats, we are on good terms. And, that's really all I need from a heart - I don't care if it grew in me, in a lab, on a production line, or in my next door neighbour.

Lol, blood is nothing special. You must be afraid of needles, since you probabily never received or donated blood in your life.

I'm not afriad of needles but yes , I have never recieved or donated blood.

doesn't blood get replaced by the body pretty rapidly anyway? it's not like it'sa permanent 'contamination'.

The thought of people stealing my blood Is ridiculous , Regardless of the situation I would never want some ones blood or organs..

Of course it's ridiculous. But, you must realise... to many people the idea of not wanting someone else's blood to contaminate your 'pure' blood is AT LEAST that ridiculous.

As I said elsewhere - your blood isn't some perfect artifact... it's not some holy fluid that never changes. Indeed, you change the chemistry of your 'pure' blood with every breath, ignoring factors like diet and health.

I'm not a Jehovah's witness I just don't want anyone elses blood or organs , Call It what you want but I'm happy with that decision.

i didnt say you were a jw.

jws dont take blood transfusions but they DO get surgery. these days they try to reuse their own blood and to bank it if possible for future emergencies.

most people never think about such things because they have no religious reason to avoid transfusions.

therefore if you dont want to die in some future emergency, i am suggesting that you talk to the people who HAVE thought this out and might be willing to give you a bit of advice on what you need to do to protect yourself.

it would be very stupid of you to wait until you are bleeding to death to inform everyone that you would rather die than have someone else's blood in your body and that you have done nothing to prepare for the day that you need a transfusion.

Faced with an actual choice between a debilitating and painful slow death... and a fresher start with a new organ... I wonder how strongly you'd stand by such a policy.

Well I wouldn't let myself die slowly ..

Do you even know where blood comes from?

You keep talking about thinks like purity... and I don't see how that logically connects with the reality of blood - it ONLY makes sense in the context of ideas of racial or religious 'purity'.

I meant purity as my blood being purely "my own" no other.

doesn't blood get replaced by the body pretty rapidly anyway? it's not like it'sa permanent 'contamination'.

That's one of the things I'm taling about. The reason people have to have repeat transfusions is that blood is not some miraculous fluid that remains in some kind of antiseptic stasis.

Of course it's ridiculous. But, you must realise... to many people the idea of not wanting someone else's blood to contaminate your 'pure' blood is AT LEAST that ridiculous.

As I said elsewhere - your blood isn't some perfect artifact... it's not some holy fluid that never changes. Indeed, you change the chemistry of your 'pure' blood with every breath, ignoring factors like diet and health.

I mean pure as In , only consists of my own blood. Maybe using pure was a poor choice of word seeing how this turned out.

Well I wouldn't let myself die slowly ..

No?

I don't understand what you are trying to peddle as a value system... blood transfusion is wrong, but suicide is okay?

doesn't blood get replaced by the body pretty rapidly anyway? it's not like it'sa permanent 'contamination'.

Well Its not like the outside blood gets removed or anything , Its still there. With orgasn well .. The organs are pretty much there for good.

I meant purity as my blood being purely "my own" no other.

And that is a nonsense. Every meal you eat changes your blood. Every breath you take changes your blood. The idea of your 'own' blood is somewhat nonsensical.

It's kind of like stressing out about which water to put in your car's washer reservoir... so long as the water meets certain minimum quality standards, it really doesn't matter where you get it.

No?

I don't understand what you are trying to peddle as a value system... blood transfusion is wrong, but suicide is okay?

I have no porblems with suicide , Suicide Is basically a right to everybody since nobody should be aload to tell some one whether they are allowed to live or die. I never said blood transfusion Is wrong I just said i wouldn't want It. I'm okay with it happening aslong as Its not to me

Well Its not like the outside blood gets removed or anything , Its still there. With orgasn well .. The organs are pretty much there for good.

You really have no idea?

You should probably look into it a little, if it matters that much to you... you are making your own position seem inane, because you have no idea about the mechanisms involved.

Sure - organs are there for good... but your body is constantly 'cleaning' your blood, and throwing away the old stuff.

And that is a nonsense. Every meal you eat changes your blood. Every breath you take changes your blood. The idea of your 'own' blood is somewhat nonsensical.

It's kind of like stressing out about which water to put in your car's washer reservoir... so long as the water meets certain minimum quality standards, it really doesn't matter where you get it.

Well I mean It In the sense of It being generated and created by my own body. Blood Is completely different to car's resevoir , I wouldn;t care what I out in my aslong as Its decent quality.

I mean pure as In , only consists of my own blood. Maybe using pure was a poor choice of word seeing how this turned out.

now i might be wrong here, but i'm fairly sure that red blood cells don't even have DNA in them so they're going to be exactly the same as anyone elses (unless they had sickle-cell anaemia, in which case they wouldn't be able to give blood anyway). and they make up like 99% of your blood (i think)..

I'm not afriad of needles but yes , I have never recieved or donated blood.


Then I recomend you become aware of your ignorance and understand that there is nothing mystical or eternal about your body. The human body, just like every other living being out there, is ever changing and in constant growth and death. Blood cells hardly last more than a few months, and after that they die and others take their place. Besides that, blood is nothing more than water, platetes and other smaller ingredients.

Once you stop seeing your body as a single entity, but as a complex group of billions of individual components, these ignorant concepts you have about yourself will end.

And receiving someone´s blood or organs is a honor. Just to imagine that someone had a important part of themselves for years, ate every day to make their body grow, took care of their health and kept their organs healthy, and after their death are willing to give the most important thing they have, their own body to someone else so they may live, is just amazing. If you ever reject a gift like this you´re a complete fool.

I have no porblems with suicide , Suicide Is basically a right to everybody since nobody should be aload to tell some one whether they are allowed to live or die. I never said blood transfusion Is wrong I just said i wouldn't want It. I'm okay with it happening aslong as Its not to me

Doesn't match your arguments. You have talked about 'purity' and you have talked about 'morals'. Logically - you must think it is 'wrong'... you just don't care if other people do 'wrong' things.

I think you have an idea you've really neither researched nor thought through. That makes it something of a blind prejudice, and it's going to get ripped to shreds every time you try to match it against a logical process.

My advice would be retire your argument, go find yourself some information on the science of blood, transfusion, and transplant - and build yourself a solid platform for your 'beliefs'. You never know... you might find a logical argument, or you might have to accomodate a new view - but at least you'll be able to support it.

Well Its not like the outside blood gets removed or anything , Its still there

yes... it does. it is broken down and excreted as you make more new blood cells.

You really have no idea?

You should probably look into it a little, if it matters that much to you... you are making your own position seem inane, because you have no idea about the mechanisms involved.

Sure - organs are there for good... but your body is constantly 'cleaning' your blood, and throwing away the old stuff.

I'ver never really seen or read anything about the blood "throwing" It away . Although I can understand it cleaning and removing the old stuff.

Well I mean It In the sense of It being generated and created by my own body. Blood Is completely different to car's resevoir , I wouldn;t care what I out in my aslong as Its decent quality.

You remind me of someone. This someone was a clever fellow who would create different personas and different arguments... just to stir a reasonable debate. I wonder if It Is what we are seeing here?

On the other hand, if not, and this is an earnest proposition... surely you realise that blood generated or created by your own body, is contaminated far more by your everyday diet, exercise regime and natural body chemistry, than it would be by transfusion? In the long term, at least?

Doesn't match your arguments. You have talked about 'purity' and you have talked about 'morals'. Logically - you must think it is 'wrong'... you just don't care if other people do 'wrong' things.

I think you have an idea you've really neither researched nor thought through. That makes it something of a blind prejudice, and it's going to get ripped to shreds every time you try to match it against a logical process.

My advice would be retire your argument, go find yourself some information on the science of blood, transfusion, and transplant - and build yourself a solid platform for your 'beliefs'. You never know... you might find a logical argument, or you might have to accomodate a new view - but at least you'll be able to support it.

No I don't think Its wrong , I just don't want It done to myself. I would have to be incredibly ingorant to think that any form of blood transfusion Is inherently wrong. I'm not being remotely prejudiced , I just don't want some one elses blood or organs . Why are you gettign so worked up about It?

I'ver never really seen or read anything about the blood "throwing" It away . Although I can understand it cleaning and removing the old stuff.

Cleaning and removing the old stuff ---> excretion ---> throwing away the old material.

No I don't think Its wrong , I just don't want It done to myself. I would have to be incredibly ingorant to think that any form of blood transfusion Is inherently wrong. I'm not being remotely prejudiced , I just don't want some one elses blood or organs . Why are you gettign so worked up about It?

because it's unbelievably foolish and illogical and you haven't demonstrated any clear reasoning for it beyond some feeling you have. just sounds like a weird neurosis to me.

You remind me of someone. This someone was a clever fellow who would create different personas and different arguments... just to stir a reasonable debate. I wonder if It Is what we are seeing here?

On the other hand, if not, and this is an earnest proposition... surely you realise that blood generated or created by your own body, is contaminated far more by your everyday diet, exercise regime and natural body chemistry, than it would be by transfusion? In the long term, at least?

I'm fine with knowledge of what my blood Is made up of but I still wouldn't wan't some one elses.

Then I recomend you become aware of your ignorance and understand that there is nothing mystical or eternal about your body. The human body, just like every other living being out there, is ever changing and in constant growth and death. Blood cells hardly last more than a few months, and after that they die and others take their place. Besides that, blood is nothing more than water, platetes and other smaller ingredients.

Once you stop seeing your body as a single entity, but as a complex group of billions of individual components, these ignorant concepts you have about yourself will end.

And receiving someone´s blood or organs is a honor. Just to imagine that someone had a important part of themselves for years, ate every day to make their body grow, took care of their health and kept their organs healthy, and after their death are willing to give the most important thing they have, their own body to someone else so they may live, is just amazing. If you ever reject a gift like this you´re a complete fool.


I know and see my body as a group of indivigual components making one whole thing . But that doesn't change the fact I don't want other peoples blood and organs. I am well aware that the body is not mystical and eternal , If It were eternal then we wouldn't even need blood transufsions or transplants. I would reject the offer because I am sure It would be better of going to some one who wants It rather than myself.

because it's unbelievably foolish and illogical and you haven't demonstrated any clear reasoning for it beyond some feeling you have. just sounds like a weird neurosis to me.

Well I am not sure how to word It properly without It being misinterpreted.

Cleaning and removing the old stuff ---> excretion ---> throwing away the old material.

I pretty much guessed that .

No I don't think Its wrong , I just don't want It done to myself. I would have to be incredibly ingorant to think that any form of blood transfusion Is inherently wrong. I'm not being remotely prejudiced , I just don't want some one elses blood or organs . Why are you gettign so worked up about It?

If you have an argument that is not rational nor logical... it is prejudice. Whether or not the word is agreeable, that's what it is.

Am I getting worked up over it? Not that I've noticed.

But, it's just like me to point out the logical inconsistency in an argument. That's not anger, or even passion... just a brain that won't tolerate incompatability.

Well I am not sure how to word It properly without It being misinterpreted.

obviously

If you have an argument that is not rational nor logical... it is prejudice. Whether or not the word is agreeable, that's what it is.

Am I getting worked up over it? Not that I've noticed.

But, it's just like me to point out the logical inconsistency in an argument. That's not anger, or even passion... just a brain that won't tolerate incompatability.

Your getting worked up In the sense your making such a big deal about It. I wouldn't call It prejudice just because I don't want some one elses blood or organs but I'm not going to try and argue to you that Its not since you already have your mind made up and I would just be watsing both of our times.

A question ,Why are all of you so bothered that I don't want to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant ? I know you find It illogical and ignorant but theres no need to press press your beliefs and arguments against me .

A question ,Why are all of you so bothered that I don't want to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant ? I know you find It illogical and ignorant but theres no need to press press your beliefs and arguments against me .

well you did make a thread about it in a forum that is heavily populated with people who like to debate.

well you did make a thread about it in a forum that is heavily populated with people who like to debate.

I guess , But the thread wasn't meant to be based around the fact I don't want a transfusion or tansplant.

Your getting worked up In the sense your making such a big deal about It. I wouldn't call It prejudice just because I don't want some one elses blood or organs but I'm not going to try and argue to you that Its not since you already have your mind made up and I would just be watsing both of our times.

I'm not worked up... I'm not making a big deal about it.

You raised the issue on a debate forum. Here, we debate. So - if you present something illogical, the flaws will be pointed out to you.

I assume you already KNOW this, or you wouldn't have wasted time posting it on a debate forum. So - the question becomes... what did you really want? People to just smile and nod? People to accept your 'preached' argument?

And again - we are back to quibbling the semantics... you don't call it 'prejudice'... but that's what it is. Calling a dog's tail a leg, doesn't mean dogs have five legs. I'm not making a judgement about whether it is right or wrong to be prejudiced about it - I'm just highlighting toyou that it is prejudice, not reason, that seems to inform your decision.

A question ,Why are all of you so bothered that I don't want to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant ? I know you find It illogical and ignorant but theres no need to press press your beliefs and arguments against me .

Why post your belief and argument here, then?

Dd you not want it debated?

I guess , But the thread wasn't meant to be based around the fact I don't want a transfusion or tansplant.

oh? what was it based on then?

I'm not worked up... I'm not making a big deal about it.

You raised the issue on a debate forum. Here, we debate. So - if you present something illogical, the flaws will be pointed out to you.

I assume you already KNOW this, or you wouldn't have wasted time posting it on a debate forum. So - the question becomes... what did you really want? People to just smile and nod? People to accept your 'preached' argument?

And again - we are back to quibbling the semantics... you don't call it 'prejudice'... but that's what it is. Calling a dog's tail a leg, doesn't mean dogs have five legs. I'm not making a judgement about whether it is right or wrong to be prejudiced about it - I'm just highlighting toyou that it is prejudice, not reason, that seems to inform your decision.

You are making a big deal about It , No matter what I say say your adamant about telling i'm a idiot for having my beliefs about it. The issue raised was not my beliefs but rather would have a transplant or tranfusion but that quikcky got absorbed by people telling me i'm a illogical fool. What I wanted to was whether you would and why you would not whether you think my point of view is logical enough for your standards. I fail to see how It Is prejudice simply because I don't want it to happen to me. I am neither prejudiced against the ude of transfusions or transplant nor the thought of others peoples organs and blood being unworthy.
I simply just don't want it , Its like saying some one doesn't want to eat something and calling It prejudice.

oh? what was it based on then?

Whether you would want a transfusion or transplant and why.

Why post your belief and argument here, then?

Dd you not want it debated?

I posted my beliefs because It was requested , I didn't post them in the hope you'd argue with me about it. I wanted to see how many of you would and why not how many will debate against me.

Whether you would want a transfusion or transplant and why.

okay, but it's you who holds the contrary opinion. the reasons for having a transfusion or transplant are self evident. the reasons against are held only by you and jehovah's witnesses (and perhaps some other religious sects) and as such they are a curiousity that begs an explanation.

I posted my beliefs because It was requested , I didn't post them in the hope you'd argue with me about it. I wanted to see how many of you would and why not how many will debate against me.

No - you posted your belief in your opening post... nothing had yet been requested of you.

You gave no details - but your first post included "I wouldn't". Thus - you presented your own agenda from the outset. Whether or not you WANTED your beliefs 'argued with' is irrelevent - you presented them, in a debate forum.

I don't want sharks to eat my legs. As a consequence, I don't swim with sharks. I suppose I could go swim with sharks, and then complain how unfair it is if they bite me... but it seems unproductive and illogical.

okay, but it's you who holds the contrary opinion. the reasons for having a transfusion or transplant are self evident. the reasons against are held only by you and jehovah's witnesses (and perhaps some other religious sects) and as such they are a curiousity that begs an explanation.

When I eventually find a way of effectively phrasing what I mean to say I will restart up this thready or something.

A question ,Why are all of you so bothered that I don't want to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant ? I know you find It illogical and ignorant but theres no need to press press your beliefs and arguments against me .

If there is one thing I hate in this world is ignorance, specially when this problem (I consider it a problem) can be easily fixed with the avaiable free information everyone has in their reach, either through the internet or books.

So whenever I see someone acting or speaking about something I think is wrong, I feel its my duty to try to fix their wrong views about the world.

I posted my beliefs because It was requested , I didn't post them in the hope you'd argue with me about it. I wanted to see how many of you would and why not how many will debate against me.

take a look at your poll

you are the only one who wouldnt have a blood transfusion or an organ transplant.

that makes you the only one to debate with now doesnt it?

you have an irrational position. you cant really expect people not to point that out.

When I eventually find a way of effectively phrasing what I mean to say I will restart up this thready or something.

righto, perhaps you ought to have formulated your argument before you started this one. just a thought, eh?

You are making a big deal about It , No matter what I say say your adamant about telling i'm a idiot for having my beliefs about it. The issue raised was not my beliefs but rather would have a transplant or tranfusion but that quikcky got absorbed by people telling me i'm a illogical fool. What I wanted to was whether you would and why you would not whether you think my point of view is logical enough for your standards. I fail to see how It Is prejudice simply because I don't want it to happen to me. I am neither prejudiced against the ude of transfusions or transplant nor the thought of others peoples organs and blood being unworthy.
I simply just don't want it , Its like saying some one doesn't want to eat something and calling It prejudice.

You said a mouthful there...

I haven't called you an idiot, nor a fool.

I have called your argument illogical, because it is not based on logic. Not my fault, that's just how it works.

It isn't about whether your "point of view is logical enough" for my "standards"... it is about whether it is logical. My standards be hanged. You presented an illogical premise, and the lack of logic has been demonstrated. You can do with that what you like.

It is prejudice "simply because I don't want it to happen to me"... it is inherently prejudiced, because it is not based on rationality. Again - your debate isn't with me, but with the English language - if you don't want to call it 'prejudice', feel free not to. It won't make it any less a 'prejudice', though.

And, let's be completely logical about it - if you choose not to eat something, and you have no reason for that choice... it is prejudice. On the other hand, if you are allergic to it, you have a logical platform... you could make an argument about the 'prejudice' there.

If there is one thing I hate in this world is ignorance, specially when this problem (I consider it a problem) can be easily fixed with the avaiable free information everyone has in their reach, either through the internet or books.

So whenever I see someone acting or speaking about something I think is wrong, I feel its my duty to try to fix their wrong views about the world.

This "problem" won't be fixed because I am going to stand by what I think regardless , It's hardly much of "problem" to concern you. If I end up dead because of what I think then so be it. Are you not being rather ignorant about the fact I do not want a transufsion or transplant and am indifferent to the effects. So do you regularly argue and push your thoughts on people who think differently to you? 'Cause thats sounds a bit ignorant of other peoples thoughts..

I get very disturbed by having things that didn't naturally grow in my body, be in my body.

I don't think I would.

CS, i don't reckon i'd be alone in thinking that this is just some odd fancy that you are going to grow out of in a couple of years. i find it difficult to believe that someone could reach adulthood (with all the experience and responsibility for making tough decisions that entails) while still holding such beliefs.

You said a mouthful there...

I haven't called you an idiot, nor a fool.

I have called your argument illogical, because it is not based on logic. Not my fault, that's just how it works.

It isn't about whether your "point of view is logical enough" for my "standards"... it is about whether it is logical. My standards be hanged. You presented an illogical premise, and the lack of logic has been demonstrated. You can do with that what you like.

It is prejudice "simply because I don't want it to happen to me"... it is inherently prejudiced, because it is not based on rationality. Again - your debate isn't with me, but with the English language - if you don't want to call it 'prejudice', feel free not to. It won't make it any less a 'prejudice', though.

And, let's be completely logical about it - if you choose not to eat something, and you have no reason for that choice... it is prejudice. On the other hand, if you are allergic to it, you have a logical platform... you could make an argument about the 'prejudice' there.

Well you may not of but I recall most of the people on your side doing so . I do not care how logical It Is . I don't want a transfusion and transplant , I recognise how illogical It Is and I have said I am okay with It as long as Its not done to me . Well If the person doesn't want to eat something because they are not remotely inclined to or want to does that make it prejudice?

righto, perhaps you ought to have formulated your argument before you started this one. just a thought, eh?

:headbang: I didn't start this argument , I asked people about whether they would and why and I was aksed why I wouldn't and then you and the other people on your side started the argument by penalising me about it. Maybe you should of checked how this argument was started before you go shooting of your mouth eh?

Well you may not of but I recall most of the people on your side doing so . I do not care how logical It Is . I don't want a transfusion and transplant , I recognise how illogical It Is and I have said I am okay with It as long as Its not done to me . Well If the person doesn't want to eat something because they are not remotely inclined to or want to does that make it prejudice?

Yes

Yes

Dundee-Fienn has answered this one for me. Quoted for Truth.

CS, i don't reckon i'd be alone in thinking that this is just some odd fancy that you are going to grow out of in a couple of years. i find it difficult to believe that someone could reach adulthood (with all the experience and responsibility for making tough decisions that entails) while still holding such beliefs.

That might happen though I don't It will . But meanwhile I still don't want a transfusion or transplant.


.. I'm getting pretty bored and annoyed at having to type transfusion and transplant now..

:headbang: I didn't start this argument , I asked people about whether they would and why and I was aksed why I wouldn't and then you and the other people on your side started the argument by penalising me about it. Maybe you should of checked how this argument was started before you go shooting of your mouth eh?

you started this thread in a debate forum...

i would say "sorry, i didn't mean to sound condescending" but the fact is i did and i couldn't help myself. you weren't supposed to get all angry about it though.

That might happen though I don't It will . But meanwhile I still don't want a transfusion or transplant.


.. I'm getting pretty bored and annoyed at having to type transfusion and transplant now..

lol :p

:headbang: I didn't start this argument , I asked people about whether they would and why and I was aksed why I wouldn't and then you and the other people on your side started the argument by penalising me about it. Maybe you should of checked how this argument was started before you go shooting of your mouth eh?

You seem to be getting a little confrontational.

You presented an argument in your opening post, it was responded to... no one was penalised. Why so angry?

That might happen though I don't It will . But meanwhile I still don't want a transfusion or transplant.


.. I'm getting pretty bored and annoyed at having to type transfusion and transplant now..

"Copy and Paste" can be your friend, too. :)

Dundee-Fienn has answered this one for me. Quoted for Truth.

So because something doesn't want to eat something at the moment thats prejudice ... I don't get how that is because if thats true and you put it into context most thigns are prejudice . Like yesterday I didn't feel inclined to walk home from school so I caguth a bus is that prejudice?

Just because some one doesn't want to do something at any given times doesn't make them prejudiced.

I get very disturbed by having things that didn't naturally grow in my body, be in my body.

I don't think I would.

it does seem pretty icky

but if you were bleeding out from some horrible accident you would consent to a transfusion without hesitation then feel icky about it at your leisure.

I get very disturbed by having things that didn't naturally grow in my body, be in my body.

I don't think I would.

I don't think you really thought about your argument.

I very rarely eat ANYHTHING that grew naturally in my body. I suspect this is true for most people.

Most of the things I chose to have in my body, come from outside of it.

So because something doesn't want to eat something at the moment thats prejudice ... I don't get how that is because if thats true and you put it into context most thigns are prejudice . Like yesterday I didn't feel inclined to walk home from school so I caguth a bus is that prejudice?

Just because some one doesn't want to do something at any given times doesn't make them prejudiced.

I think the problem you're having with this is that you are taking the word to be offensive. It doesn't have to be in every context

If you don't want a transfusion or a transplant, fine with me. Just don't sue me when you die of blood loss or heart failure. ;)

I think the problem you're having with this is that you are taking the word to be offensive. It doesn't have to be in every context

Again, Dundee-Fienn has made my input redundant. Quoted for More Truth.

I'm getting hostile because I am fed up of people caliming I'm prejudiced and a fool simply because I don't want want a transfusion and transplant. I asked people whether they would and why and said I wouldn't . I wanted people tlak about whether they would and why . I didn't want them to interpret my thoughts as a cause for a argument. I am not angry as such just very irritated that people are getting so bothered about the fact that I don't want a transfusion or transplant to the point where they decide to even call me prejudiced simply because i am not inclined to do it.
Well, what happened to the "it's my body, I'll do whatever I want with it" argument???

OMG time warp!!!!

I think the problem you're having with this is that you are taking the word to be offensive. It doesn't have to be in every context

I'm getting offended at the idea that people think i'm prejudiced simply because I don't want something happening to me. I'm not remotely prejudiced about transfusion etc , I just don't want them to happen to me.

You seem to be getting a little confrontational.

You presented an argument in your opening post, it was responded to... no one was penalised. Why so angry?

I'm getting hostile because I am fed up of people caliming I'm prejudiced and a fool simply because I don't want want a transfusion and transplant. I asked people whether they would and why and said I wouldn't . I wanted people tlak about whether they would and why . I didn't want them to interpret my thoughts as a cause for a argument. I am not angry as such just very irritated that people are getting so bothered about the fact that I don't want a transfusion or transplant to the point where they decide to even call me prejudiced simply because i am not inclined to do it.

So because something doesn't want to eat something at the moment thats prejudice ... I don't get how that is because if thats true and you put it into context most thigns are prejudice . Like yesterday I didn't feel inclined to walk home from school so I caguth a bus is that prejudice?

Just because some one doesn't want to do something at any given times doesn't make them prejudiced.

No, you were not prejudiced against walking.

Why not?

Because you had a reason to: The bus would probably take shorter time to get you home.

If not, walking would mean exerting physical effort, which can be bothersome if you're tired.

Hence, there are many reasons for it.

There are plenty of reasons for refusing blood. None of them have anything to do with purity of blood, because they can easily be shot down.

No, you were not prejudiced against walking.

Why not?

Because you had a reason to: The bus would probably take shorter time to get you home.

If not, walking would mean exerting physical effort, which can be bothersome if you're tired.

Hence, there are many reasons for it.

There are plenty of reasons for refusing blood. None of them have anything to do with purity of blood, because they can easily be shot down.

Well no , I regularly walk home , the bus isn't really that much faster and I'm never really tired after a short walk. I don't believe in purity of blood I just used the word as a way to express the fact I want my blood to be my own not the biproduct of soem one else.

I'm getting hostile because I am fed up of people caliming I'm prejudiced and a fool simply because I don't want want a transfusion and transplant. I asked people whether they would and why and said I wouldn't . I wanted people tlak about whether they would and why . I didn't want them to interpret my thoughts as a cause for a argument. I am not angry as such just very irritated that people are getting so bothered about the fact that I don't want a transfusion or transplant to the point where they decide to even call me prejudiced simply because i am not inclined to do it.

You are prejudiced... unless you can show a logical premise. It's not an insult, it's a qualitative measure of your argument.

As for calling you a fool... can you actually present instances? I've not seen anyone do it - but perhaps I haven't read every post in perfect detail. Cite them, by all means.

But - you will find people calling your premise 'illogical' and 'irrational' - if you don't present a rationale or some logic. It's not an insult - it is simply stating the qualitative nature of your argument. If you want that to go away - present rational and logical evidence to support your position.

I get very disturbed by having things that didn't naturally grow in my body, be in my body.

I don't think I would.

AHaha you must be a virgin. Body fluids are quite nasty, but you get used to it.

Again, Dundee-Fienn has made my input redundant. Quoted for More Truth.

YAY :D

I'm getting hostile because I am fed up of people caliming I'm prejudiced and a fool simply because I don't want want a transfusion and transplant. I asked people whether they would and why and said I wouldn't . I wanted people tlak about whether they would and why . I didn't want them to interpret my thoughts as a cause for a argument. I am not angry as such just very irritated that people are getting so bothered about the fact that I don't want a transfusion or transplant to the point where they decide to even call me prejudiced simply because i am not inclined to do it.

You are prejudiced because you refuse to do something for no reason.

It's a fact, not an insult. And besides, this is NSG: The OP has no control over what the debate will be about and furthermore, this is still on topic.

Well no , I regularly walk home , the bus isn't really that much faster and I'm never really tired after a short walk. I don't believe in purity of blood I just used the word as a way to express the fact I want my blood to be my own not the biproduct of soem one else.

And here we come back to the crux... what makes your blood 'your own'? It is made of the things you eat, and the air you breathe. Does the simple fact that it is 'made' in your body make it special? If so - do you attach similar special significance to your own mucus, urine and feces?

Well, what happened to the "it's my body, I'll do whatever I want with it" argument???

OMG time warp!!!!

I pointed that out when I said , regardless i do not want it happening to my body.

YAY :D

I was hoping to get to 20,000 posts before I retired... you are speeding my demise by making me superfluous. :D

I pointed that out when I said , regardless i do not want it happening to my body.
Okay, it's your call. ;)

You are prejudiced... unless you can show a logical premise. It's not an insult, it's a qualitative measure of your argument.

As for calling you a fool... can you actually present instances? I've not seen anyone do it - but perhaps I haven't read every post in perfect detail. Cite them, by all means.

But - you will find people calling your premise 'illogical' and 'irrational' - if you don't present a rationale or some logic. It's not an insult - it is simply stating the qualitative nature of your argument. If you want that to go away - present rational and logical evidence to support your position.

i'll put my hand up, i did say his argument was foolish and illogical. couldn't think of a better word at the time i'm afraid.

You are prejudiced... unless you can show a logical premise. It's not an insult, it's a qualitative measure of your argument.

As for calling you a fool... can you actually present instances? I've not seen anyone do it - but perhaps I haven't read every post in perfect detail. Cite them, by all means.

But - you will find people calling your premise 'illogical' and 'irrational' - if you don't present a rationale or some logic. It's not an insult - it is simply stating the qualitative nature of your argument. If you want that to go away - present rational and logical evidence to support your position.

Not everytihng has to be logical , like religion is generally illogical . Are all religions that re rmeotely illogical prejudiced? I fail tos ee how just because something Is illigocal It instanbtly becomes prejudice. I have said before I am not prejudiced about the topic I simply don't want it . And northern borders ahs called me a fool atleast twice and I remember the first ebing on either page 2 or 3.

Well no , I regularly walk home , the bus isn't really that much faster and I'm never really tired after a short walk. I don't believe in purity of blood I just used the word as a way to express the fact I want my blood to be my own not the biproduct of soem one else.

Blood is not a biproduct of someone else. My blood is the exact same blood as roughly 30-40% of the population around me. There is no difference between my blood and their blood. Their body will not reject it when I donate it.

Yes, i would have for both for modical reason ... but i hope i don't need it in my whole life ...

P.S.
I misunderstood the poll and placed the wrong answer! :(

Yes, i would have for both for modical reason ... but i hope i don't need it in my whole life ...

P.S.
I misunderstood the poll and placed the wrong answer! :(

Unlikely to drastically alter the balance-of-power. :D unless you vote 30 times... .which it won't let you.

Also - welcome to NS!

I was hoping to get to 20,000 posts before I retired... you are speeding my demise by making me superfluous. :D

Superfluous automatically makes me think of third nipples. Unfortunately i'll now be attaching that thought to every post you make from this point. I 'pologise :p

Blood is not a biproduct of someone else. My blood is the exact same blood as roughly 30-40% of the population around me. There is no difference between my blood and their blood. Their body will not reject it when I donate it.

Really ? whats in your blood is decided by what you eat , drink . breathe , take in etc . So is 30-40 % of the population exactly the same as you int erms of eating , drinking , breathing in the same place etc? Anyway your body produces this blood therefore its a biproduct of your body.

This "problem" won't be fixed because I am going to stand by what I think regardless , It's hardly much of "problem" to concern you. If I end up dead because of what I think then so be it. Are you not being rather ignorant about the fact I do not want a transufsion or transplant and am indifferent to the effects. So do you regularly argue and push your thoughts on people who think differently to you? 'Cause thats sounds a bit ignorant of other peoples thoughts..

I dont care. If I see someone ignorant, first I try to help, then I laugh at them if they dont try to improve.

I have absolutely no respect for anyone that is proud of their ignorance or mystical views of the world. I respect the truth above everything else, and I cant respect anyone that dont respect the truth.

So, well, its your loss. Yet you will probabily plead for help and blood if you ever get into an accident. If you die for your beliefs, great, but I cant respect you when these beliefs are not worth dying for, meaning I would see you as a complete and utter fool who deserved to die for the benefit of natural selection and the quality of the human species.

Superfluous automatically makes me think of third nipples. Unfortunately i'll now be attaching that thought to every post you make from this point. I 'pologise :p

:D Worse things have been said about me. I think I can survive.

Of course, if you keep posting all my arguments before me... the number of posts you'll have to suffer 'third-nipple-vision' on is going to be pretty small. :D

Really ? whats in your blood is decided by what you eat , drink . breathe , take in etc . So is 30-40 % of the population exactly the same as you int erms of eating , drinking , breathing in the same place etc?

You realise your body will normalise any blood you are transfused with, to match up with the rest of your blood pretty quickly. Your blood is filtered 60x per day if I remember correctly

You are prejudiced because you refuse to do something for no reason.

It's a fact, not an insult. And besides, this is NSG: The OP has no control over what the debate will be about and furthermore, this is still on topic.

I have a reason but I cannot phrase It properly yet , And surely as some one said , Its my body and I'll do what I want with it is good enough reason . I know very well I have no control but that doesn't mean I didn't have intentions for what was to follow.

Not everytihng has to be logical , like religion is generally illogical . Are all religions that re rmeotely illogical prejudiced?

Yeah, they are actually. They are choosing to believe one deity above others, regardless of the fact that every religion has as much truth as the other.

I fail tos ee how just because something Is illigocal It instanbtly becomes prejudice. I have said before I am not prejudiced about the topic I simply don't want it . And northern borders ahs called me a fool atleast twice and I remember the first ebing on either page 2 or 3.

It is prejudice because it has no reason. There is no reason to believe the bible above the koran or the torah or any other holy book.

I have a reason but I cannot phrase It properly yet , And surely as some one said , Its my body and I'll do what I want with it is good enough reason . I know very well I have no control but that doesn't mean I didn't have intentions for what was to follow.

Its a good enough reason for your personal choices but it is still not logical. I don't have a problem with that. I'm curious to know why you are so irritated by the use of prejudice to describe your position on this issue

I have a reason but I cannot phrase It properly yet , And surely as some one said , Its my body and I'll do what I want with it is good enough reason . I know very well I have no control but that doesn't mean I didn't have intentions for what was to follow.

It isn't "your" blood, anymore than my blood is my blood. My blood is A+ and anyone who has A+ has the exact same blood that I do running in their veins.

Really ? whats in your blood is decided by what you eat , drink . breathe , take in etc . So is 30-40 % of the population exactly the same as you int erms of eating , drinking , breathing in the same place etc? Anyway your body produces this blood therefore its a biproduct of your body.

No, it is not a biproduct. A biproduct is something that is created as a side-effect. So, creating blood (which is a product), creates waste biproducts. However, no production in your body creates blood as a biproduct.

30-40% of the population have bodies that will accept my blood. As far as the blood cells go, yeah, they are exactly the same. If they weren't, their bodies would not be the same bloodtype as me.

i'll put my hand up, i did say his argument was foolish and illogical. couldn't think of a better word at the time i'm afraid.

I can say your argument is foolish, without calling you a fool. It's what makes an ad hominem attack an effective, but fallacious, approach - attacking the poster not the post.

Your opinion is that the argument is foolish. My opinion is that my son taking his own diaper off is 'bad'. That doesn't mean my son is 'bad'... just a baby.

I dont care. If I see someone ignorant, first I try to help, then I laugh at them if they dont try to improve.

I have absolutely no respect for anyone that is proud of their ignorance or mystical views of the world. I respect the truth above everything else, and I cant respect anyone that dont respect the truth.

So, well, its your loss. Yet you will probabily plead for help and blood if you ever get into an accident. If you die for your beliefs, great, but I cant respect you when these beliefs are not worth dying for, meaning I would see you as a complete and utter fool who deserved to die for the benefit of natural selection and the quality of the human species.

Well I will call you ignorant for your lack of understanding that other people can believe what they wnat without having to fear you whining at them. It might be a loss in your eyes but i consider it a greater loss to have some one elses bodily parts or fluid. I will not plead for blood or body parts if i were ever in need . As for natural selection I have done a good job of living with the help of other peoples blood or body parts , thena gian so has humanity for a vast majority of its existance . Just because there is one good thing that may help me live and i refuse doesn't mean i will die by means of natural selection . (Ofcourse I am refering to the fact I am refusing and I don't need It not that I need it and I am refusing It)

Not everytihng has to be logical , like religion is generally illogical . Are all religions that re rmeotely illogical prejudiced? I fail tos ee how just because something Is illigocal It instanbtly becomes prejudice. I have said before I am not prejudiced about the topic I simply don't want it . And northern borders ahs called me a fool atleast twice and I remember the first ebing on either page 2 or 3.

I think you are reading a diffferent meaning into 'prejudice'... and attaching far too much significance to it. If using the word 'prejudice' makes you feel bad about your argument... maybe you should examine your argument?

I will not plead for blood or body parts if i were ever in need .

You can't be certain of that. You may hope that this would be your reaction but that still doesn't make it certain. It's kind of like the phrase 'There's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole'

Its a good enough reason for your personal choices but it is still not logical. I don't have a problem with that. I'm curious to know why you are so irritated by the use of prejudice to describe your position on this issue

Because I am not prejudiced about the issue I simply don't want it to happen to me. If my belief Is illogical to your eyes and that of most of the world then so be it. I also find it quiet irritated because I am not really prejudiced about things.

I think you are reading a diffferent meaning into 'prejudice'... and attaching far too much significance to it. If using the word 'prejudice' makes you feel bad about your argument... maybe you should examine your argument?
Maybe it's time for examining the dictionary and look for a different word to use. Prejudice has caused a lot of ill feelings in this thread.

Because I am not prejudiced about the issue I simply don't want it to happen to me. If my belief Is illogical to your eyes and that of most of the world then so be it. I also find it quiet irritated because I am not really prejudiced about things.

May I ask for your definition of the word?

You can't be certain of that. You may hope that this would be your reaction but that still doesn't make it certain. It's kind of like the phrase 'There's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole'

I'm pretty certain about that , I have been In situations before with things like that . (I'm not refering to the blood and organs thing but generally things that I disagree with or don't want are tested like If I ever where to need blood / organs)

I wouldn't be able to stand having some one elses organ or there blood . As wierd as It sounds my bloods mean to much for me to have It diluted with some one elses.

You're not a mormon/jehovah's witness are you?

I'm pretty certain about that , I have been In situations before with things like that . (I'm not refering to the blood and organs thing but generally things that I disagree with or don't want are tested like If I ever where to need blood / organs)

Unless those situations were a matter of life or death I don't think they are comparable

Because I am not prejudiced about the issue I simply don't want it to happen to me. If my belief Is illogical to your eyes and that of most of the world then so be it. I also find it quiet irritated because I am not really prejudiced about things.


prej·u·dice

–noun 1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.
4. such attitudes considered collectively: The war against prejudice is never-ending.
5. damage or injury; detriment: a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.
–verb (used with object) 6. to affect with a prejudice, either favorable or unfavorable: His honesty and sincerity prejudiced us in his favor.
—Idiom


http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prejudice

At the very least, the first two definitions apply in this case. Possibly elements of the third, and arguably the sentiment of the fifth.

:eek:

Are you saying I'm not ?!





Joking aside , I'm not.

Is your decision based on religious reasons at all? Just to make things completely clear

You're not a mormon/jehovah's witness are you?

:eek:

Are you saying I'm not ?!





Joking aside , I'm not.

:eek:

Are you saying I'm not ?!





Joking aside , I'm not.

Is there no religious reason at all for your beliefs?

Maybe it's time for examining the dictionary and look for a different word to use. Prejudice has caused a lot of ill feelings in this thread.

I'm the one who needs to do some bookstudy, here?

I'm using the English language appropriately. I also have a pretty good knowledge of the subject matter of the debate.... I'll leave that open for thought.

May I ask for your definition of the word?

Well I consider prejudice to be decisision / thought / idea made without the person properly thinking or consider it and without enough information to properly judge It.

Well something along those lines anyway.

Is there no religious reason at all for your beliefs?

None at all , I don't let religion cloud my judgement.

Unless those situations were a matter of life or death I don't think they are comparable

I guess you could say your right but , I would stand beside my thoughts and beliefs regardless of whether I was dying . Unless I decided to change them for whatever reason , But the point Is i will stand beside my opinion regardless of the situation. I can't exactly accept the blood / organs and then continue to disagree with It being done to me.

I'm going offline now for about 5 mintues ..To finish scanning my computer and restart it.

I guess you could say your right but , I would stand beside my thoughts and beliefs regardless of whether I was dying . Unless I decided to change them for whatever reason , But the point Is i will stand beside my opinion regardless of the situation. I can't exactly accept the blood / organs and then continue to disagree with It being done to me.

But you can't possibly know that you will hold on to your principles when faced with death. If you had been through such an experience then I would be more inclined to believe your assertion but until that time I think we'll have to agree to disagree

None at all , I don't let religion cloud my judgement.

Well there must be something that clouds your judgement, it's not like your using logic and reasoning.

Well I will call you ignorant for your lack of understanding that other people can believe what they wnat without having to fear you whining at them. It might be a loss in your eyes but i consider it a greater loss to have some one elses bodily parts or fluid. I will not plead for blood or body parts if i were ever in need . As for natural selection I have done a good job of living with the help of other peoples blood or body parts , thena gian so has humanity for a vast majority of its existance . Just because there is one good thing that may help me live and i refuse doesn't mean i will die by means of natural selection . (Ofcourse I am refering to the fact I am refusing and I don't need It not that I need it and I am refusing It)

Well, then good luck, you will need it.

I'ver never really seen or read anything about the blood "throwing" It away . Although I can understand it cleaning and removing the old stuff.

You've never seen yourself pee?

What the heck did you think was going on there? :confused:

Incidentally, I do hope that you're aware that you shared someone else's blood and organs for nine months.

If you've ever had invasive surgery, chances are you've had a blood transfusion. If you ever need invasive surgery, chances are you'll need a blood transfusion. I honestly cannot wrap my head around the OPers dislike of the concept of "mixing blood", since every second your bone marrow will replace two million of your (or the donated) cells with new blood. You're going to only have your own blood after a while; the donation is not permanant.

Maybe the OP is a white supremacist? :p

Well there must be something that clouds your judgement, it's not like your using logic and reasoning.

lol, QFT.

Maybe the OP is a white supremacist? :p

Assuming they are white. Although I guess it could also be some strange scenario like the blind black white supremacist

A question ,Why are all of you so bothered that I don't want to have a blood transfusion or organ transplant ? I know you find It illogical and ignorant but theres no need to press press your beliefs and arguments against me .

Maybe we don't want you to put your life at risk for a silly reason.

Blood transplant = changing the entire amount of blood in the body (medical reasons exist and it's possible but very dangerous procedure).

Blood transfusion = adding someone else's blood (which has been separated into plasm, platelets and red bloodcells, the rest of the stuff such as white blood cells taken out, and then reconstituted for use in a hospital) into your veins to prevent you from dying from blood loss.

So yes, I'd have blood transfusion but not blood transplant. How should I vote, then?

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

yes.

would you ever consider spelling lessons?

:D

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

Yes, I like life.

Well I would hate having some one elses blood. I would never now If It feels different and I won't ever try It.

It feels no different.

Dieing < Getting someone elses blood

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

I would. Unless I was really old then I'd let nature take it's course. But if I had my whole life ahead of me or at least a good chance of living longer, I'd take it. I don't see why I wouldn't.

I'm pretty happy that my good friend doesn't hold the same belief as you, as he would be dead now.

I have been fortunate that I haven't needed any transfusions, but when I delivered my oldest daughter, they had blood on the way up, as I was hemorrhaging. Luckily, I didn't need it. Not that I wouldn't have accepted it, but more that it was better that I didn't need it.

Heck, I figure you can believe what you believe....leaves more organs and blood for the rest of us who choose NOT to die. There is a shortage of blood and organs anyway...so better that you don't take them.

Where's the maybe/I don't know option?

Voted yes for both.

I've been in the position of having transfusions during surgery a couple of times... without the blood, chances are I wouldn't be here to argue about it.

As for organs, if it ever comes to the point where a transplanted organ would improve my quality of life I would accept the procedure, and be glad that I had the option.

To take it further (although it might be better as a separate thread) I have registered my wish that - when I do eventually croak - any and all of my organs should be made available for transplants and/or research. My rationale for this is simple... I wont be needing them any more and I'd like to leave some legacy beyond being fertiliser.

Isn't this like asking if you were low on oxygen if you would like to get more to breath?

maybe a blood transfusion, but not a transplant. i also wouldn't have an organ transplant done. Oh, and my organs are mine, I'll take them to the grave. If someone cannot live without an organ transplant they shouldn't survive. Its best for the human race as a whole if weak genes were not allowed to survive.

maybe a blood transfusion, but not a transplant. i also wouldn't have an organ transplant done. Oh, and my organs are mine, I'll take them to the grave. If someone cannot live without an organ transplant they shouldn't survive. Its best for the human race as a whole if weak genes were not allowed to survive.

You are asserting that, with several thousand years of 'civilisation' under our belts... the most significant thing a person can offer is their genetic material?

As It say above , Would you ever have a blood or organ tranplant If you needed It?

I wouldn't.

(Poll coming)

Let's hope you don't ever get a bad bleeding injury! Because you're dead then.


Hmm, die from blood loss or organ failure or feeling self rightous and assuming that everything has aids...

I think I want to live thank you very much.

You are asserting that, with several thousand years of 'civilisation' under our belts... the most significant thing a person can offer is their genetic material?

Civilization is mankinds worst mistake. And yes, continuing the human race is the greatest thing a person can achieve.

maybe a blood transfusion, but not a transplant. i also wouldn't have an organ transplant done. Oh, and my organs are mine, I'll take them to the grave. If someone cannot live without an organ transplant they shouldn't survive. Its best for the human race as a whole if weak genes were not allowed to survive.

I think that's a wonderfully enlightened concept - let's just get rid of the medical profession altogether. Those that can't survive are probably best cleansed from the Earth anyway.

Oh, wait...there is that thing about evolution and genetic success being a fickle, capricious muse. Yes, there is the problem concerning us not knowing what a "weak" or "strong" gene is and of course the fact that we have no idea what future pressures will be imposed upon our genome and so we have absolutely no means of identifying which genes will help us against the next pandemic/natural disaster. Well, anyway, why should we let that stop us from making facile snap value judgements based on nothing? Let's ban medicine!!

Civilization is mankinds worst mistake. And yes, continuing the human race is the greatest thing a person can achieve.

What a peculiar perspective. Everything that humans have done is for naught... but you sure as hell want to make sure they keep doing it?

If we are nothing but pointless breeders, what is the point in continuing to assert our genes at all? Indeed - if it's such a chore to be civilised... why waste your time in things like 'debate'? And - how can you justify your use of the tools of civilisation.. like the internet?

I'm willing to be you don't express the courage of these convictions in the real world.

What a peculiar perspective. Everything that humans have done is for naught... but you sure as hell want to make sure they keep doing it?

If we are nothing but pointless breeders, what is the point in continuing to assert our genes at all? Indeed - if it's such a chore to be civilised... why waste your time in things like 'debate'? And - how can you justify your use of the tools of civilisation.. like the internet?

I'm willing to be you don't express the courage of these convictions in the real world.

It is strange, I know. The tempations of civilization are strong, and I was born into it. I do, however, express these convictions. I don't stand on street corners with signs and shout them, however.

Isn't the first step in solving a problem (civilization), acknowledging that there is a problem,and to that you need to talk about it.

It is strange, I know. The tempations of civilization are strong, and I was born into it. I do, however, express these convictions. I don't stand on street corners with signs and shout them, however.

Isn't the first step in solving a problem (civilization), acknowledging that there is a problem,and to that you need to talk about it.

I've lived both ends of the spectrum. I've lived out of reach of civilisation. I've eaten only what I've grown, foraged or killed. I've even made my own clothing. At the other end of the spectrum, I've lived in one of the biggest cities in the world, and I've plied my trade in silicon innovations.

Most people I've ever met, have never experienced a 'primitive' life, and really couldn't handle it if they ever encountered one. People that bleat about the ills of civilisation are all too often so pampered they'd die in days, left to their own devices, outside the reach of society.

But - all that aside... you honestly believe that we have nothing worthy to offer than our genetic material? Hawking is a waste of space? Shakespeare is worthless if you find out he was club-footed?

If we were on the border of extinction - maybe there is an argument for attaching that kind of sanctity to the formula of a sperm... but, for me at least, with a population of 6 billions... it seems like our genetic contribution might be an irrelvence.

I've lived both ends of the spectrum. I've lived out of reach of civilisation. I've eaten only what I've grown, foraged or killed. I've even made my own clothing. At the other end of the spectrum, I've lived in one of the biggest cities in the world, and I've plied my trade in silicon innovations.

Most people I've ever met, have never experienced a 'primitive' life, and really couldn't handle it if they ever encountered one. People that bleat about the ills of civilisation are all too often so pampered they'd die in days, left to their own devices, outside the reach of society.

But - all that aside... you honestly believe that we have nothing worthy to offer than our genetic material? Hawking is a waste of space? Shakespeare is worthless if you find out he was club-footed?

If we were on the border of extinction - maybe there is an argument for attaching that kind of sanctity to the formula of a sperm... but, for me at least, with a population of 6 billions... it seems like our genetic contribution might be an irrelvence.

Why did you live out of reach of civiliztion, and for how long?

Hawking is brilliant, yes, but his findings/theories, are not necessary. What do I care about black holes? Space? Quantum mechanics? Nothing. I want learn about which plant I can eat, how to make a spear, how to track a deer, how to go out and LIVE!

I agree that with more than 6 billion people genetic contribution is not at important, but hey, I don't want my family line to die out!

Why did you live out of reach of civiliztion, and for how long?

Hawking is brilliant, yes, but his findings/theories, are not necessary. What do I care about black holes? Space? Quantum mechanics? Nothing. I want learn about which plant I can eat, how to make a spear, how to track a deer, how to go out and LIVE!

I agree that with more than 6 billion people genetic contribution is not at important, but hey, I don't want my family line to die out!

Ok, you don't want your family line to die out? Have lots of children, then.

If you want to know how to survive in the wild, there are books and organizations devoted to that sort of thing. Why don't you go do that, learn how to hunt properly, how to be self-reliant. Human's have known how to be self reliant for thousands of years, and we haven't forgotten.

You don't care about science. Bully for you. I do care about science. I think it's a great thing that Hawking wasn't left on the side of the mountain for the wolves.

Survival is important, but once survival has been achieved, there is so much more that can be done. Why give up on progress?

Why give up on progress?
'
Because it isn't progress! From the moment mankind first started growing food and settling down we have been spiraling downward! War, famine, disease, greed, gender inequality, etc all sprang from agriculture and civilization. Technology, and other inventions are just tools to keep mankind elslaved to 'progress', to keep thinking that eveything keeps getting better, when it gets worse and worse. New medical problems arise every year, mental disorders increasing every year. Frued stated something to the effect that eventually civilization will reach the point where everyone lives in a state of neurosis. I think we are fast approaching this point.

'
Because it isn't progress! From the moment mankind first started growing food and settling down we have been spiraling downward! War, famine, disease, greed, gender inequality, etc all sprang from agriculture and civilization. Technology, and other inventions are just tools to keep mankind elslaved to 'progress', to keep thinking that eveything keeps getting better, when it gets worse and worse. New medical problems arise every year, mental disorders increasing every year. Frued stated something to the effect that eventually civilization will reach the point where everyone lives in a state of neurosis. I think we are fast approaching this point.

Frued also thought that all women had penis envy. Frued was wrong about a lot of things. Lifespan is three times what it was when we were hunter gatherers. War has always existed, just with smaller groups of people. Tribes killed each other over hunting grounds and religious differences. And men have been oppressing women since the beginning of time. Famine was, and is, common among hunter gatherer societies. disease was even more common. Do you honestly think that humans lived in some paradise before we started planting our own food? We started planting our own food because it allowed us to live better, easier lives than we could before that.
I challenge you to name one specific thing and prove that it was better ten thousand years ago than it is now.

Frued also thought that all women had penis envy. Frued was wrong about a lot of things. Lifespan is three times what it was when we were hunter gatherers. War has always existed, just with smaller groups of people. Tribes killed each other over hunting grounds and religious differences. And men have been oppressing women since the beginning of time. Famine was, and is, common among hunter gatherer societies. disease was even more common. Do you honestly think that humans lived in some paradise before we started planting our own food? We started planting our own food because it allowed us to live better, easier lives than we could before that.
I challenge you to name one specific thing and prove that it was better ten thousand years ago than it is now.

Become enlightened, my friend:
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/massmisery.htm
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/patriarchy.htm
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/technology.htm
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/agriculture.htm

More essay's here:
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/

Some books:
http://www.amazon.com/Endgame-Vol-1-Problem-Civilization/dp/158322730X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-9320649-7131668?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181517730&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Endgame-Vol-Resistance-Derrick-Jensen/dp/1583227245/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/105-9320649-7131668?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181517730&sr=8-2

http://www.amazon.com/Running-Emptiness-Civilization-John-Zerzan/dp/092291575X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-9320649-7131668?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181517787&sr=1-1

A great movie that's on youtube (in 7 parts, overall about an hour long (a little less))

It is called Surplus: Terrorized into Being a Consumer.

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZ7hMd1tIU
Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NhJ7uf47F0
Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6nisHtVl40
Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcXxRn52QfI&mode=related&search=
Part 5:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11aDlgTkML4&mode=related&search=
Part 6:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vly3ddxjbQ8&mode=related&search=
Part 7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clCeugNsDUA&mode=related&search=

Ok, I won't watch all of this (don't have several hours to devote to understanding your ideology.) I don't suppose you could have found something more comprehensive?
Become enlightened, my friend:
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/massmisery.htm
The latest date given in this piece is more than ten years ago, and it focuses almost entirely in America, which has it's own social problems. Further, it states "There is now convincing evidence that precivilized life was a time of non-dominance and equality" something it fails to support. I have never seen any such evidence. 90% of the paper is banging on about how Freud was wrong about a lot of things, something that everyone in psychology knows.

http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/patriarchy.htm
It's interesting to note that nearly all of the examples of inequality mentioned in this we have moved away from in modern society. It seems to basically say "Women have been defined as passive" without ever showing that agriculture caused this. examples of a few societies are given, including among American Indians, but these examples seem flawed. Then it jumps from that to some idea that technology is patriarchy.
http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/technology.htmSimple scaremongering and unsupported opinion about what "technology really is.[QUOTE]

And with that, I've had about enough. If you have something more concise and specific, let me know.

maybe a blood transfusion, but not a transplant. i also wouldn't have an organ transplant done. Oh, and my organs are mine, I'll take them to the grave. If someone cannot live without an organ transplant they shouldn't survive. Its best for the human race as a whole if weak genes were not allowed to survive.

Don't be a moron. Most people that need organ transplants have already survived to reproductive age. Also, it's beyond silly to think that all our problems stem from civilization. Chimpanzees, our closest living relatives, regularly engage in war and genocide (they have been observed to systematically kill members of rival tribes for no purpose other than the other tribe's total destruction, usually to take over their territory). They just lack the sophisticated weapons we've developed and so are not as efficient at it. These nasty sides to human nature are not the product of civilization, since they have existed longer than the latter.

Anyway, back on topic.

As for me, I see no problem in replacing broken parts of my car, so why should I have a problem with replacing parts of my body that break or wear out? I regard myself as my mind, my personality. My body is just the vehicle for such.

I would like to nominate Trollsgaard and Cranhaden Selective for a Darwin Award.

The thought of people stealing my blood Is ridiculous , Regardless of the situation I would never want some ones blood or organs..

*steals a pint of your blood*

Muahahhaahahaahahahahahahaaaaahhahahahaaaaa.....ha

*gives you a gallbladder*

Muahahaha^2

Of course. It's not like I'd be rounding up a poor person for pints with the promise of cash or killing a clone to harvest its organs. They'd be freely donated by people interested in others. I give blood, and I'd give organs too if I could find suitable replacements for them. The gift of life is one of the most noble in the world in my opinion.

Although I'd personally prefer an artificial organ...that way, the only people involved are the ones making and installing the device and the supply is limited only by manufacturing capacity.

Of course. It's not like I'd be rounding up a poor person for pints with the promise of cash or killing a clone to harvest its organs. They'd be freely donated by people interested in others. I give blood, and I'd give organs too if I could find suitable replacements for them. The gift of life is one of the most noble in the world in my opinion.

Although I'd personally prefer an artificial organ...that way, the only people involved are the ones making and installing the device and the supply is limited only by manufacturing capacity.

An artificial organ? Wouldn't that make you...not a person? Artificial limbs are one thing, organs though...that seems a bit far. Pretty soon people will just download their concious into robots and claim to be human. Death comes to everyone, and perhaps people who need organ transplants to live have run out of time...

An artificial organ? Wouldn't that make you...not a person? Artificial limbs are one thing, organs though...that seems a bit far. Pretty soon people will just download their concious into robots and claim to be human. Death comes to everyone, and perhaps people who need organ transplants to live have run out of time...

No...

It would be awesome!

Think about it. Really think about it.
Then talk.

Er.. downloading conciousness into robots? I personally can never see that happening. Even thinking about how it would work makes my head hurt.

An artificial organ? Wouldn't that make you...not a person? Artificial limbs are one thing, organs though...that seems a bit far. Pretty soon people will just download their concious into robots and claim to be human. Death comes to everyone, and perhaps people who need organ transplants to live have run out of time...

No, simply because humanity is far more than our bodies. A person with a prosthetic leg, or a cochlear implant, or anything else is no less a person than one with full capabilities; indeed, our bodies themselves die and regenerate many times throughout our lives, yet nobody claims that they are a different person. There is no loss of continuity in these situations, and so it is impossible to claim they are not human.

The body is not the human; what is human is our soul, the elan vital that makes us what we are as people. Bodies are merely the vessel, if you will, for the human that inhabits them, and they are to be treated as the means with which the person interacts with their environment. I feel that a consciousness in a robot would be no less human than a person with their biological body because the human mind is still there. The mind, the feelings, the conscience...the ghost in the machine is what is human, not the machine itself.

And in regard to death, there is no law in existence that says our lives should be cut short or deprived due to the cruelty of nature. Human beings should be free to live as long and as fulfilling lives as they want, and then to move on to what comes next once they have left this world. Death may be a necessity, at least for the foreseeable future, but there is no reason why it should come to us in the form of suffering or pain. Peaceful death is the greatest blessing our science can give us at this point, free from pain and at the end of a long, fulfilling life.

No, simply because humanity is far more than our bodies. A person with a prosthetic leg, or a cochlear implant, or anything else is no less a person than one with full capabilities; indeed, our bodies themselves die and regenerate many times throughout our lives, yet nobody claims that they are a different person. There is no loss of continuity in these situations, and so it is impossible to claim they are not human.

The body is not the human; what is human is our soul, the elan vital that makes us what we are as people. Bodies are merely the vessel, if you will, for the human that inhabits them, and they are to be treated as the means with which the person interacts with their environment. I feel that a consciousness in a robot would be no less human than a person with their biological body because the human mind is still there. The mind, the feelings, the conscience...the ghost in the machine is what is human, not the machine itself.

And in regard to death, there is no law in existence that says our lives should be cut short or deprived due to the cruelty of nature. Human beings should be free to live as long and as fulfilling lives as they want, and then to move on to what comes next once they have left this world. Death may be a necessity, at least for the foreseeable future, but there is no reason why it should come to us in the form of suffering or pain. Peaceful death is the greatest blessing our science can give us at this point, free from pain and at the end of a long, fulfilling life.

What...I am at a loss. Having your brain dowloaded into a robot ends your humanity. You are no longer organic, of the earth, of your mother. You are the memories and...brain waves...of the person who died...a fake. Without a body the brain waves are just echoes of the person, not the real thing. The body may be a container for the sould, but the soul leaves the body at death to the afterlife, it should not linger in a machine, if that is even possible. Without an organic body someone is no longer human. (and no, i'm not talking about prosthetic limbs).

About death. If humans were meant to live forever we wouldn't age. We are born. We mature. We grow old. We die. That is the law of nature, one that should not be changed. Pain is a part of life, one that everyobdy experiences. Pain reminds people of life, it reminds that life is short and should be used to the fullest, because every moment may your last. Life is short, so drink deeply while you can! Life extending methods such as organ transplants are an abomination and discusting. Artifical organs and bodies (not arms/legs, as you can live without an arm or a leg) are also an abomination, as they interfere with the natural course of nature.

Live hard, die hard. Live well, die well. Only cowards need fear death.

What...I am at a loss. Having your brain dowloaded into a robot ends your humanity. You are no longer organic, of the earth, of your mother. You are the memories and...brain waves...of the person who died...a fake. Without a body the brain waves are just echoes of the person, not the real thing. The body may be a container for the sould, but the soul leaves the body at death to the afterlife, it should not linger in a machine, if that is even possible. Without an organic body someone is no longer human. (and no, i'm not talking about prosthetic limbs).

Organic compounds were born in the fires of ancient stars, and are comprised of inorganic atoms billions of years old. The metal of a machine was born from the same source; they are one and the same, both shaped by products of nature at one point or another in the process. There is no difference, only a change of vessels.



About death. If humans were meant to live forever we wouldn't age. We are born. We mature. We grow old. We die. That is the law of nature, one that should not be changed. Pain is a part of life, one that everyobdy experiences. Pain reminds people of life, it reminds that life is short and should be used to the fullest, because every moment may your last. Life is short, so drink deeply while you can! Life extending methods such as organ transplants are an abomination and discusting. Artifical organs and bodies (not arms/legs, as you can live without an arm or a leg) are also an abomination, as they interfere with the natural course of nature.

And, tell me, how a person suffering a painful death from cancer or seeing their entire lives dissolve thanks to Alzheimer's disease is reminded of the importance of living life? Or a person slowly dying as their organs fail, stripped of their ability to enjoy life and wracked with pain? Nature does not permit everyone to live their lives to the fullest. That is where medicine comes in, to give people who would otherwise be trapped in lives of pain or suffering the chance to fulfill their meaning. It is unimaginably cruel to condemn one person to suffering while another is allowed to live in good health simply because of their genetic roulette at birth.

There is a difference between the temporary pains of life and experience and the horrid suffering that these diseases bring upon us. Life does not have to equate with suffering, and it does not have to last as long as nature deems acceptable. It should last as long as we want, until we have done what our souls call us to do.

Nature is not in the business of beauty, it is in the business of propagation...it is man that understands beauty and meaning, and so we have to act beyond nature to achieve these things. I am not talking immortality, we are talking improving the lives of people so that they can live the lives they want and do what is meaningful to them. It is impossibly cruel

Live hard, die hard. Live well, die well. Only cowards need fear death.

Who said anything about fear? Foolish hedonism is the sign of an empty and uninspired life, not a full or happy one. Only people who have nothing to live for think that life is something that should be thrown away in the name of mindless pleasure. Meaning is inherent to the human condition, and without it our soul is corrupted and we sink in to nihilism.

I don't fear death, but I do fear dying without accomplishing something meanigful. That is the punishment I would have to bear long after I have left this world.

Organic compounds were born in the fires of ancient stars, and are comprised of inorganic atoms billions of years old. The metal of a machine was born from the same source; they are one and the same, both shaped by products of nature at one point or another in the process. There is no difference, only a change of vessels.

And, tell me, how a person suffering a painful death from cancer or seeing their entire lives dissolve thanks to Alzheimer's disease is reminded of the importance of living life? Or a person slowly dying as their organs fail, stripped of their ability to enjoy life and wracked with pain? Nature does not permit everyone to live their lives to the fullest. That is where medicine comes in, to give people who would otherwise be trapped in lives of pain or suffering the chance to fulfill their meaning. It is unimaginably cruel to condemn one person to suffering while another is allowed to live in good health simply because of their genetic roulette at birth.

There is a difference between the temporary pains of life and experience and the horrid suffering that these diseases bring upon us. Life does not have to equate with suffering, and it does not have to last as long as nature deems acceptable. It should last as long as we want, until we have done what our souls call us to do.

Nature is not in the business of beauty, it is in the business of propagation...it is man that understands beauty and meaning, and so we have to act beyond nature to achieve these things. I am not talking immortality, we are talking improving the lives of people so that they can live the lives they want and do what is meaningful to them. It is impossibly cruel

Who said anything about fear? Foolish hedonism is the sign of an empty and uninspired life, not a full or happy one. Only people who have nothing to live for think that life is something that should be thrown away in the name of mindless pleasure. Meaning is inherent to the human condition, and without it our soul is corrupted and we sink in to nihilism.

I don't fear death, but I do fear dying without accomplishing something meanigful. That is the punishment I would have to bear long after I have left this world.

Organic material and machines are fundamentally different, and you know it. Organic material lives and feels. Machines simply exist. Machines are incapable of thought and feeling, and are not human.

About people suffering from disease: Yes, it is terrible. It is heart breaking, but it happens. They should be free to end thier lives with dignity, not live on in a mockery of life living in machines. And how the hell is it cruel for one person to have good genes and another not?! There is no intential cruelty there! The one with the poor genes was just unlucky. Nature weeds them out, and it usually is in the best interests of the species to let the weak and frail die out, or at least not reproduce to perpetuate weakness.

Who said anything about throwing life away? People shouldn't be suicidal with thier lives, but neither should they be afraid to actually live, be a little risky sometimes. People should live for family, friends, nature, and fun. Everything else is meaningless.

Organic material and machines are fundamentally different, and you know it. Organic material lives and feels. Machines simply exist. Machines are incapable of thought and feeling, and are not human.



If you added the human conciousness, it negates your point.
Essentially, what you fear is what you say can't happen and if it did happen, you wouldn't oppose it?

If you added the human conciousness, it negates your point.
Essentially, what you fear is what you say can't happen and if it did happen, you wouldn't oppose it?

No. Machines cannot feel, and cannot think. Machines are programmed, they have no conciousness. Even a machine with a dowloaded person, if that is even possible, will not truly be real. It will be a fake, a copy, an echo of the real person who died.

No. Machines cannot feel, and cannot think. Machines are programmed, they have no conciousness. Even a machine with a dowloaded person, if that is even possible, will not truly be real. It will be a fake, a copy, an echo of the real person who died.

I have no idea. Lets wait until the technology is developed.

Being as I am Quite Deadly and you are just a Member, I think I win in this speculation contest.

Organic material and machines are fundamentally different, and you know it. Organic material lives and feels. Machines simply exist. Machines are incapable of thought and feeling, and are not human.

Add consciousness, and what is the difference? It would feel, it would be capable of reproduction, it would be alive. Carbon chauvinism is irrational; not all life must be made of the things life on Earth is made of to be considered as such. Organic matter is the way life developed here, but it is neither required nor likely that this would be the case on other worlds. In fact, I would go so far as to say life as we know it is a product of our rare circumstances as a planet and not the norm for the vast universe around us.

About people suffering from disease: Yes, it is terrible. It is heart breaking, but it happens. They should be free to end thier lives with dignity, not live on in a mockery of life living in machines. And how the hell is it cruel for one person to have good genes and another not?! There is no intential cruelty there! The one with the poor genes was just unlucky. Nature weeds them out, and it usually is in the best interests of the species to let the weak and frail die out, or at least not reproduce to perpetuate weakness.

And they have the freedom to make that choice. However, those who do not want to have their lives cut short like that also deserve the freedom to make the decisions necessary to have that life.

Nature may not be intentionally cruel, but there is unintentional cruelty. Intentions themselves do not matter in this regard; what matters is that it exists and that we must deal with it. Human lives are far more valuable than the amoral laws of nature, and we are more than permitted to break those laws when it will give us happier and healthier lives. Our minds allow us to examine nature both from within it and from without it, and it is from without that we decided to do more than throw ourselves at the mercy of natural forces.

Who said anything about throwing life away? People shouldn't be suicidal with thier lives, but neither should they be afraid to actually live, be a little risky sometimes. People should live for family, friends, nature, and fun. Everything else is meaningless.

Nothing is meaningless. Everything in existence has its own meaning, and it's up to us to find which of those is appropriate for us.

No. Machines cannot feel, and cannot think. Machines are programmed, they have no conciousness. Even a machine with a dowloaded person, if that is even possible, will not truly be real. It will be a fake, a copy, an echo of the real person who died.

A simulation of a human brain, or a brain built from artificial components would be capable of thought and feeling. The brain is a computer, programmed by our genetics and our experiences, that we use to interact with the world around us. It is the embodiment of the link between matter and spirit, and it does not matter what that link is made of, only that it exists.

Yes I would.

About death. If humans were meant to live forever we wouldn't age. We are born. We mature. We grow old. We die. That is the law of nature, one that should not be changed. Pain is a part of life, one that everyobdy experiences. Pain reminds people of life, it reminds that life is short and should be used to the fullest, because every moment may your last. Life is short, so drink deeply while you can!

YES! Fulfill your meaning to pop out some kids and die off, so that there can always be humans making more humans making more humans to live short, brutal, lives before dying at the age of thirty from organ failure or disease or another of a hundred human maladies that have existed for tens of thousands of years, never building anything, never accomplishing anything, never creating a great work of art, never discovering the truth about the world around them, never taking simple steps to make life easier.

I admit that there are problems with the way we live, but the solution is not to destroy all technology and modernity. That is the solution of an idiot, who cannot put a puzzle together and chooses to throw it away.

I don't think you really thought about your argument.

I very rarely eat ANYHTHING that grew naturally in my body. I suspect this is true for most people.

Most of the things I chose to have in my body, come from outside of it.

It's Ruffy. Of course he thought about his argument.

An artifical brain may be able to think, but it would not have a soul, not like a real brain, and would be fake.

Agreed.

But that all hinges on whether one believes in a soul, and whether or not 'conciousness' can be transferred.

A simulation of a human brain, or a brain built from artificial components would be capable of thought and feeling. The brain is a computer, programmed by our genetics and our experiences, that we use to interact with the world around us. It is the embodiment of the link between matter and spirit, and it does not matter what that link is made of, only that it exists.

An artifical brain may be able to think, but it would not have a soul, not like a real brain, and would be fake.

An artifical brain may be able to think, but it would not have a soul, not like a real brain, and would be fake.

How are you so sure? Did God give you the design specs for the body, pointing out the special "soul container"? how is it you know so much about how souls work? How do you know it wouldn't follow the mind into the machine?

YES! Fulfill your meaning to pop out some kids and die off, so that there can always be humans making more humans making more humans to live short, brutal, lives before dying at the age of thirty from organ failure or disease or another of a hundred human maladies that have existed for tens of thousands of years, never building anything, never accomplishing anything, never creating a great work of art, never discovering the truth about the world around them, never taking simple steps to make life easier.

I admit that there are problems with the way we live, but the solution is not to destroy all technology and modernity. That is the solution of an idiot, who cannot put a puzzle together and chooses to throw it away.

People do not need to do any of that! It is unimportant! What is important is family and friends and protecting nature! People were not meant to produce, to 'accomplish'. People were meant to fucking LIVE! I revile the modern world, everyday I look outside and rage inside about the pointlessness of civilization!

Have you ever thought that maybe life was not meant to be easy?! It's supposed to be a fucking struggle to live! You have to fight until your last breath, and then you greet death with the middle finger! Your damn right their are problems with they we live, we are killing the planet. No new technologies can come about fast enough to offset the damage we have done. The only option is to forgo the methods we have used that are killing our planet, before the damage is irrevocable! Even if the technology is there, the will is not there to change!

How are you so sure? Did God give you the design specs for the body, pointing out the special "soul container"? how is it you know so much about how souls work? How do you know it wouldn't follow the mind into the machine?

Because machines are artificial! They are FAKE! They are not natural, and are soulless tools!

I've tried my best to donate blood as often as possible, so if I needed some in return I'd happily take it.

As for an organ, I'd be very afraid of my body rejecting it and I've heard you need to take constant medication or something. I'd have to weight the pros and cons, but death is a huge con, so I would probably accept an organ transplant.

I wouldn't be able to stand having some one elses organ or there blood . As wierd as It sounds my bloods mean to much for me to have It diluted with some one elses.

How old are you?

If I needed it, yes. Hell..I would say yes to being a donour, too, if it was needed..

People do not need to do any of that! It is unimportant! What is important is family and friends and protecting nature! People were not meant to produce, to 'accomplish'. People were meant to fucking LIVE! I revile the modern world, everyday I look outside and rage inside about the pointlessness of civilization!

Have you ever thought that maybe life was not meant to be easy?! It's supposed to be a fucking struggle to live! You have to fight until your last breath, and then you greet death with the middle finger! Your damn right their are problems with they we live, we are killing the planet. No new technologies can come about fast enough to offset the damage we have done. The only option is to forgo the methods we have used that are killing our planet, before the damage is irrevocable! Even if the technology is there, the will is not there to change!

*runs as fast as I can, in the opposite direction*

I have thought about all of that.
All we really need to do is limit the population through such things as 1 child per family. No need to go around letting pneumonia victims suffer and die early.

Hawking is brilliant, yes, but his findings/theories, are not necessary. What do I care about black holes? Space? Quantum mechanics? Nothing. I want learn about which plant I can eat, how to make a spear, how to track a deer, how to go out and LIVE!

So what the living fuck are you doing on the damned computer?

Have you ever thought that maybe life was not meant to be easy?!

Where exactly are you getting this "meaning" from?

Where exactly are you getting this "meaning" from?

The horrifying suffering he experienced as an upper-middle class kid who never knew want.

So what the living fuck are you doing on the damned computer?

Googling...shhh
:p

How else is he supposed to learn all of that?

And what scares me is that he sounds like what I would sound like, if I had taken my ideas and just tossed them violently against a wall, along with bashing my head, so I could no longer see that life wasn't so terrible how it is currently, and that not all people have the same views.

The horrifying suffering he experienced as an upper-middle class kid who never knew want.

It sounds like he watched Fight Club one too many times.

People do not need to do any of that! It is unimportant! What is important is family and friends and protecting nature! People were not meant to produce, to 'accomplish'. People were meant to fucking LIVE! I revile the modern world, everyday I look outside and rage inside about the pointlessness of civilization!

Have you ever thought that maybe life was not meant to be easy?! It's supposed to be a fucking struggle to live! You have to fight until your last breath, and then you greet death with the middle finger! Your damn right their are problems with they we live, we are killing the planet. No new technologies can come about fast enough to offset the damage we have done. The only option is to forgo the methods we have used that are killing our planet, before the damage is irrevocable! Even if the technology is there, the will is not there to change!

You know what, stop being a fucking hypocrite. If you so hate the modern world, get off the damn computer and go live in a cave or the trees.

I'm against environmental destruction, too, but at least I don't ramble on idiotically about how humans were somehow noble before we were 'civilized.' War, violence, hatred, even genocide are not unique to our species. If you would have us live without various things we've come up with, to the ripe old age of thirty five, our only thoughts simply be breeding machines then start practicing what you're fucking preaching.

If you do any of the following:

Eat food you did not pick or kill yourself or get from an immediate peer
Wear clothes
Ride in cars, buses, trains, bikes, airplanes
go to the doctor
take medicine
go to the dentist
live in a home constructed with anything but the simplest tools/materials
take showers instead of washing by swimming in rivers
cook
use a toilet instead of crapping in the woods and wiping with leaves
use electricity

Than you are the height of hypocrisy.

I would like to nominate Trollsgaard and Cranhaden Selective for a Darwin Award.

How old are you?

The horrifying suffering he experienced as an upper-middle class kid who never knew want.

I approve of the lolowned! content of these particular posts.

Trollgaard... Nazism much?

Wow, I just read this entire thread. Just when I thought the argument couldn't get any stupider Trollgaard pops up. I mean really, it boggles the mind that these people know how to use a computer in the first place.

If you don't want a transfusion or a transplant, fine with me. Just don't sue me when you die of blood loss or heart failure. ;)

Uh, how the hell would he sue you if he was dead? IDIOT!! :p

Not everytihng has to be logical , like religion is generally illogical . Are all religions that re rmeotely illogical prejudiced?

Yes. And you are too. What makes it even more ironic is you don't seem to grasp the meaning of the word prejudice.

Superfluous automatically makes me think of third nipples. Unfortunately i'll now be attaching that thought to every post you make from this point. I 'pologise :p

http://dermatology.cdlib.org/124/case_presentations/pseudomamma/conde.html

Hmm, die from blood loss or organ failure or feeling self rightous and assuming that everything has aids...

Not to mention cancer treatment, which is where the majority of donated blood goes.

An artificial organ? Wouldn't that make you...not a person? Artificial limbs are one thing, organs though...that seems a bit far. Pretty soon people will just download their concious into robots and claim to be human. Death comes to everyone, and perhaps people who need organ transplants to live have run out of time...

Is this guy serious?

People do not need to do any of that! It is unimportant! What is important is family and friends and protecting nature! People were not meant to produce, to 'accomplish'. People were meant to fucking LIVE! I revile the modern world, everyday I look outside and rage inside about the pointlessness of civilization!

Have you ever thought that maybe life was not meant to be easy?! It's supposed to be a fucking struggle to live! You have to fight until your last breath, and then you greet death with the middle finger! Your damn right their are problems with they we live, we are killing the planet. No new technologies can come about fast enough to offset the damage we have done. The only option is to forgo the methods we have used that are killing our planet, before the damage is irrevocable! Even if the technology is there, the will is not there to change!

Those bold parts I find hilarious. Life doesn't have a meaning- how could it? It spontaneously arouse billions and billions of years ago. Did you find some hidden abstract written by the first self-replicating cell that gave a brief run-down on what life means? I'd love to read it...

Because machines are artificial! They are FAKE! They are not natural, and are soulless tools!
I know a lot of humans who are soulless tools...

People do not need to do any of that! It is unimportant! What is important is family and friends and protecting nature! People were not meant to produce, to 'accomplish'. People were meant to fucking LIVE! I revile the modern world, everyday I look outside and rage inside about the pointlessness of civilization!

Maybe you should blow off some steam by smashing the hideous, modern, soulless computer that you are using to access the internet.


Have you ever thought that maybe life was not meant to be easy?!

Life isn't "meant" to be anything. It just is. Sometimes life is easy. Sometimes it is hard.


It's supposed to be a fucking struggle to live! You have to fight until your last breath, and then you greet death with the middle finger!

Why are you typing away gleefully on an internet forum, instead of out wrasslin' bears or something?


Your damn right their are problems with they we live, we are killing the planet. No new technologies can come about fast enough to offset the damage we have done. The only option is to forgo the methods we have used that are killing our planet, before the damage is irrevocable! Even if the technology is there, the will is not there to change!
Flinging yourself wildly from one extreme to another is fun when you are on a swing set, but it's probably not the best plan for shaping a better world.

Uh, how the hell would he sue you if he was dead? IDIOT!! :p
Now I have a companion up there in the "intentionally thick" category.