From: "Bob Malecki" <malecki-AT-mail.bip.net>
Subject: SV: M-TH: Medical Ethics
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 06:08:54 +0100



Leo writes!

>It is worthwhile to recall how this particular thread got started. It came
out
>of a discussion in which one side denied there was a need for morality or
>moral judgment, now and in a socialist society of the future. There would
be
>no 'hard choice' under socialism, it was claimed. In response to those who
>argued that this was a wildly utopian vision of a future society, and that
>moral judgment and 'hard choices' were part of the substance of human
>existence, the 'no hard choices' (sounds like a California advertising
slogan
>for new age clothing to me) crowd declared that their critics were
captivated
>by bourgeois and petty-bourgeois individualism and property relations. It
was
>in this context that I raised the issue of how a very precious and scarce
>resource, livers which could be transplanted to individuals who would die
>without them, could be allocated, today or in such a society, if not by a
>system based on moral guidelines. It is important, I believe, to keep this
>context in mind, as the thread proceeds.

I have really tried to stay out of this fake debate. But the whole debate
starting as described above is really just putting morals on a pedestal with
a loaded question on liver transplants. I suggest that well pickled Russian
livers be brought into the debate and the whole concept of ever lasting life
which is at the bottom of the transplant debate here..

To think that livers are "precious" is just ridiculous. The whole point
being supply and demand. In state power communist education will tear down
the myths of life and organs connected to religion and morals over the long
term and will address the issue in a more concious materialist manner..

Thus the ideology will be if I have to go or go then certainly any healthy
organs worth while to be used transplant should go to the local bank. The
rest we can burn up in the local incinerator providing warth and energy for
the living and communist society in general..

>From the veery beginning both sides of this debate have had prepared
positions to defend and thrown in flukes like "liver" tranplants to shore up
their arguements..

In fact the liver plays the same ideological role as Ralphs use of "cunt"..

Warm regards
Bob Malecki







     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---