[Organ donation Question]

Alright, so we just disagree with the premise.

"There are currently approximately 1,731 people on Ontario's waiting lists for organ transplants. It is estimated that in 1999 over 100 Ontarians died waiting for a transplant. All predictions are that the waiting lists will continue to grow, the wait for a transplant will become longer and more people will die waiting if nothing is done to improve organ and tissue donation in our Province. (7) "

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summa...86-15534050_ITM

Organ shortage as a stratagy is not working.

[Organ donation Question]

Sorry i dont know how to quote,

"and donating is the sacrifice of that value (freedom) which might have been restored to me not donating" But this is only correct if preceded by "I argued that if, by refusing to donate ones organs, the government will be persuaded to end the prohibition" and its this premis of your agument that i'm having a problem with. I think it the "If" part.

You would not use that premis without the "if" and If you did retract it, then I could easily disagree with that statement.

[Organ donation Question]

To get back to my original question,

Paul, you now say "I argued that if, by refusing to donate ones organs, the government will be persuaded to end the prohibition, then it would be immoral to donate ones organs"

Well isnt this like saying "if my aunt had balls"?

I could say "if, by refusing to buy gas and drive on roads, the government will be persuaded to reduce taxes, then it would be immoral to drive on roads"

Clearly its not immoral to drive on roads. Here is my original question.

"if i decide to donate my organs, freely without coercion, under the terms the govt has stipulate, I dont think this would be and immoral act. "

Do objectivists agree or disagree?

[Organ donation Question]

Thanks Jake, k-mac, its nice to know my "gut" reaction has been trained well..... cuz I don't do so much book learnin

[Organ donation Question]

Someone made the following assertion,

"until its leagal to set the price of organs, until you are free to decide who these organs go to, it is immoral to contribute your organs"

Which means that the same contribution made when the law is changed, would all of a sudden be moral?

I think i disagree, if i decide to donate my organs, freely without coercion, under the terms the govt has stipulate, I dont think this would be and immoral act.

Is this correct?

The statement was made here

6:24 to 6:40

[Rational person in an irrational socitety?]

I'm going to have to dig up that essay and read it again, because latley I feel my calling is to walk the streets, hit people in the head with a baseball bat and say "don't be such a dumb ass".

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080617/...c_child_psychic

The teachers assisstant told the teacher (who should have hit her in the head with a baseball bat), the teacher told the school Principal (who should have hit him/her in the head with a baseball bat), the principal told child services (who should have hit him/her in the head with a baseball bat) And the mother? well I really hope she gets her apology.

[Wesley Snipes sentenced to 3 years in prison]

Who cares? Well I guess I do, I took the time to post.

Snipes was not convicted of filing a false return.

Snipes was not convicted of evading taxes

He charged with failing to file

And upon further searching (saved $5), it looks like my curiosity has been satisfied

"The Internal Revenue Code is law. It was passed by the United States Congress. It does not come from the IRS. The IRS writes regulations that help implement the Code, but the Code itself was passed by Congress. Under the Constitution, if a bill is passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President, it is the law. That's what happened with the Internal Revenue Code, so the Code is the law."

Internal Revenue Code Section 7203

Section 7203.

Willful failure to file return, supply information, or pay tax

Any person required under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, or required by this title or by regulations made under authority thereof to make a return, keep any records, or supply any information, who willfully fails to pay such estimated tax or tax, make such return, keep such records, or supply such information, at the time or times required by law or regulations, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $25,000 ($100,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. In the case of any person with respect to whom there is a failure to pay any estimated tax, this section shall not apply to such person with respect to such failure if there is no addition to tax under section 6654 or 6655 with respect to such failure. In the case of a willful violation of any provision of section 6050I, the first sentence of this section shall be applied by substituting ''felony'' for ''misdemeanor'' and ''5 years'' for ''1 year''.

Cheers

[Wesley Snipes sentenced to 3 years in prison]

Now i'm curious if there is a law requiring people to file a 1040. I'm not speaking about whether income tax is constitutional or that whole "position 861" thing. Snipes was convicted of "willfully failing to file federal tax returns" Is that a real law? What is the criminal code number? The best source I'v found so far is at 5:08 of this interveiw with Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=styYIG-fiEc He says there is no law. I'm Canadian so this does not affect me. But I do find this very curious.

So to quote the tax freedom crusaders "show me the law!"