• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should a Convicted Child Molester Get a Heart Transplant at Tax Payer Expense?

Should a Convicted Child Molester Get a Heart Transplant at Tax Payer Expense?

  • He should be released because he's sick and tax payers should pay for the transplant if he cannot.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • He should be released and the tax payers should not be on the hook for his care.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    38
They should perform the first half of the operation.
 
They should perform the first half of the operation.

What's that story about 2 women claim the same baby as their own, The wise king orders the baby cut in half. One woman screams that she is lying. The wise king now knows who the mother of the baby is, Or something like that.
 
Under the socialized medicine scam the fascists passed last year, the whole matter is irrelevant.

The courts will rule that the convict must be awarded the best care, since he will not have any alternative. That the fascist state is bent on denying all alternatives to law abiding ciitzens who aren't members of congress, judges, union leaders, or their families, is also irrelevant.
 
I think it's hard to say because you don't want to rob a person who has not committed a crime from getting a transplant which may be the case if you allow criminals to have them. But at the same accord, less you gave a life sentence you don't really want to condemn a man to death. Still I would have more sympathy for the common citizen in need of a heart as opposed to the criminal. And perhaps that's emotional, but that's pretty much how I feel.

That's also a reasonable constraint on the consumption of a scarce precious resource. Part of the answer would be for what is this man convicted of. An eighteen year term indicates a truly serious violation. He wasn't flashing his lily at the park.

It is certainly proper for the board allocating this heart to judge among the various recipients on their social merits. It can only go in one chest, and that's all there it to that. It should not be a blind lottery. Some people have, by their actions, earned the chance to be refused.

That's only fair.
 
This was in the news today;


Fox23: Taxpayers to finance rapist prisoners heart transplant - Crime Confidential - Capital Region cops and courts - timesunion.com - Albany NY

So, what's your opinion on what should happen here?

These will be the choices once I get the poll up.

-He should be released from prison because he's sick and tax payers should pay for the transplant if he cannot.
-He should remain in prison and get the transplant at tax payers expense.
-He should remain in prison and he should get the transplant but only if he or his family can raise the money themselves. (I had to shorten this one for the poll)
-He should be released from prison and the tax payers should not be on the hook for his care.
-He should remain in prison and he's a sexual predator so he should not get a heart.
-I don't know.

He should get the transplant -- unless transplant committees address the issue of incarceration. And I would be amazed if they did. What if the guy were in jail for 2 years for stealing a car? We should just let him die?
 
No, it isn'. It delivers neither justice nor revenge. It's a game that's played, that's all.

We agree, so what do we do to change that?
 
Because it's a justice system, not a revenge system.

no system can provide "justice". that being said, my basic question remains - why don't we execute child rapists.
 
He should get the transplant -- unless transplant committees address the issue of incarceration. And I would be amazed if they did. What if the guy were in jail for 2 years for stealing a car? We should just let him die?

gosh, you mean committing a crime might reduce your ability to exercise your freedom or quality of life?

here's a way of reversing the question:

by providing exceedingly expensive healthcare to prisoners gratis; aren't we providing people with serious health conditions an incentive to commit crime?
 
Solomon.
What my statement means is that they should cut his heart out, and stop there.
 
by providing exceedingly expensive healthcare to prisoners gratis; aren't we providing people with serious health conditions an incentive to commit crime?


When I first got diagnosed with isolated left ventricular non-compaction and told a heart transplant is in my future I entertained the thought about that. But is that how I would want spend the last 5 years of my life? Nah.
 
1. In this link there is no reference at all to prisoners of the state (while it does talk about the government paying for transplants.)

Organ Transplants: Ethical Issues

It's safe to assume that the board never discussed this potential scenario because come on, how many of them actually ever deal with individuals such as pedophiles or would ever expect a ward of a state prison in their operating room for a heart transplatn.

2. Basic Medical Care is what is offered in a hospital emergency room. To answer the question as to whether or not a heart transplant is "basic medical care" ask yourself: Is this procedure currently done in a hospital emergency room for an individual with no insurance?

3. The state has an obligation to provide reasonable medical care to the prisoner, at taxpayer expense, to ensure he can reasonably live out his natural life. So, is a heart transplant part of his natural life or is it an extension of his natural life? They answer that question in the link I posted above also.

4. Quality of life - While the merit system has long been determined to not be fair, the quality of life afforded by the transplated organ to it's recipient is. Who will have a better quaity of life? Will it be a pedophile serving time in a state prison under the watchful eye of armed guards or will it be an average Joe who has never broken a law in his life, beyond traffic laws, and wants to help raise his kids and maybe even his grandkids? Which recipient will have a greater quality of life?

What's my opinion? I personally think we should do the the operation as follows:

1. Administer local anesthesia to the prisoner's chest.
2. Utilizing scalpel & rib spreaders let's get him open.
3. Hook-up the bypass machine to make sure he doesn't die on the table while his heart is out.
4. Remove his heart.
5. Place it on a tray right in front of him, just out of reach.
6. Chop up his heart that was just removed with a meat cleaver.
7. Leave the room. The anesthesia will wear off eventually.

But then again, I'm a sick demented individual they say when it comes to kiddie diddlers.

No transplant is my determination after looking at the material currently available on this topic and upon review of my personal feelings towards perverts.

***Touch my kids and I don't care if I've gotten 90 cops on my tail. I'm comin' in full throttle and I will get to you first. While your being dropped in a hole by 6 I will be judged by 12. I'm bettin' that at least one will be a father who thinks like me.
 
by providing exceedingly expensive healthcare to prisoners gratis; aren't we providing people with serious health conditions an incentive to commit crime?

This is more of a complaint about how atrociously hard it is to receive such expensive but necessary healthcare with no, or limited insurance instead of how prisoners receive healthcare.
 
This is more of a complaint about how atrociously hard it is to receive such expensive but necessary healthcare with no, or limited insurance instead of how prisoners receive healthcare.

not really, it's pointing out that policies have unintended consequences. giving prisoners expensive beneifts = lowering the incentive not to be a prisoner.
 
We, as a society, have determined that his crimes were not sufficient to warrant death and we have stripped him of his capacity to earn a living, including insurance. If we deny him the transplant, that is the equivalent of upgrading his sentence to the death penalty without a trial. While I am certainly comfortable with imposing the death penalty on those who abuse children, it must be done legally and in compliance with due process.
 
not really, it's pointing out that policies have unintended consequences. giving prisoners expensive beneifts = lowering the incentive not to be a prisoner.

The incentive to not be a prisoner is not having to live in jail. And yes it is.
 
He should remain in prison and get the transplant at tax payers expense.

He was sentenced, and he should fulfil that sentence.

he should absolutely NOT receive a transplant at taxpayer's expense.
 
1. In this link there is no reference at all to prisoners of the state (while it does talk about the government paying for transplants.)

Organ Transplants: Ethical Issues

It's safe to assume that the board never discussed this potential scenario because come on, how many of them actually ever deal with individuals such as pedophiles or would ever expect a ward of a state prison in their operating room for a heart transplatn.

2. Basic Medical Care is what is offered in a hospital emergency room. To answer the question as to whether or not a heart transplant is "basic medical care" ask yourself: Is this procedure currently done in a hospital emergency room for an individual with no insurance?

3. The state has an obligation to provide reasonable medical care to the prisoner, at taxpayer expense, to ensure he can reasonably live out his natural life. So, is a heart transplant part of his natural life or is it an extension of his natural life? They answer that question in the link I posted above also.

4. Quality of life - While the merit system has long been determined to not be fair, the quality of life afforded by the transplated organ to it's recipient is. Who will have a better quaity of life? Will it be a pedophile serving time in a state prison under the watchful eye of armed guards or will it be an average Joe who has never broken a law in his life, beyond traffic laws, and wants to help raise his kids and maybe even his grandkids? Which recipient will have a greater quality of life?

What's my opinion? I personally think we should do the the operation as follows:

1. Administer local anesthesia to the prisoner's chest.
2. Utilizing scalpel & rib spreaders let's get him open.
3. Hook-up the bypass machine to make sure he doesn't die on the table while his heart is out.
4. Remove his heart.
5. Place it on a tray right in front of him, just out of reach.
6. Chop up his heart that was just removed with a meat cleaver.
7. Leave the room. The anesthesia will wear off eventually.

But then again, I'm a sick demented individual they say when it comes to kiddie diddlers.

No transplant is my determination after looking at the material currently available on this topic and upon review of my personal feelings towards perverts.

***Touch my kids and I don't care if I've gotten 90 cops on my tail. I'm comin' in full throttle and I will get to you first. While your being dropped in a hole by 6 I will be judged by 12. I'm bettin' that at least one will be a father who thinks like me.
You are a sick, demented individual and I respect you for it. Did you see "Law Abiding Citizen"? I think you would like it, especially the beginning.
 
You are a sick, demented individual and I respect you for it. Did you see "Law Abiding Citizen"? I think you would like it, especially the beginning.

Yes, I am a very sick, demented individual. Don't forget serial & twisted in those too. They wanna put me on meds to cure my demented mind but then what great forms of torture would I be able to come up with for these scumbags?

Of course, we should give the poor pedophile some antibiotics while he's layin' there on the table cut open, hate to see him die of an infection.
 
The incentive to not be a prisoner is not having to live in jail.

given that people deliberately commit crimes to get into jail (petty crime spikes in my hometown as winter approaches, for example), that doesnt' strike me as much of a counterincentive to someone seeking to avoid hefty medical bills.

And yes it is.

with respect, it's my argument. i think it's a safe bet that I know better where I'm coming from than you do.
 
Yes, I am a very sick, demented individual. Don't forget serial & twisted in those too. They wanna put me on meds to cure my demented mind but then what great forms of torture would I be able to come up with for these scumbags?

Of course, we should give the poor pedophile some antibiotics while he's layin' there on the table cut open, hate to see him die of an infection.


have you ever read Peter Rothfuss? a favorite phrase that has stuck with me from his books; one character is threatning another

...and if you screw me over, I will cut you from neck to navel, pull you open, and splash around inside you like a child in a mud puddle...

i've admired that imagery ever since i read it.
 
Back
Top Bottom