[DancesWithCats]

I’m being a little sarcastic, but the erosion of freedom (should this come to the U.S.) is still the erosion of freedom. That includes the freedom to be selfish.

well you can be selfish all you want by just signing an Opt Out card. Your choice. No problem.

[MortMan]

Your response was predictable, and completely misses my point. I have not even broached my own stance on organ donorship, so that dog won’t hunt. I’m talking about freedom.

To reverse the logic, though... You are saying that a person should have to specifically state that they DO NOT wish to participate in an act of “charity”. Dictionary.com defines charity as “generous actions or donations to aid the poor, ill, or helpless”. Your standpoint is that you should have the right to be generous with other people’s organs...

Which is no different than being generous with other people’s money - i.e. through tax-based theft.

[chesley]

Why not an ‘Opt-in” card. If you want to be charitable, shouldn’t you at least have to make a minimal effort?

[William Terrell]

well you can be selfish all you want by just signing an Opt Out card. Your choice. No problem.

There are 300,000,000 people in the US. How many functionaries will be assigned to process these cards? How will the info be stored and accessed?

Suppose you send in a card and are seriously hurt, a doctor has the "opinion" that you will not live, seeing how so many people need your parts, and the card has not been processed yet?

Suppose there are computer glitches? Name/number identity mistakes? Mean and/or vengeful, or profit hungry bureaucrat "mistakes"? Will each baby born be provided for a card?

Perhaps you should move the the United Kingdom; the IQ level here in America may be too high for you to be comfortable here.