Imagine your child needs a heart transplant. If she gets it in time, she’ll live a long, healthy life. Without it, your child has, at most, one year to live. The article “Why Legalizing Organ Sales Would Help Save Lives, End Violence” published in The Atlantic on November 11, 2011, written by Anthony Gregory, claims that organ sales should be legalized because many people die on the transplant list before they can get an organ. Gregory gives an insight on some of the benefits of organ transplants and how in some countries, it is legal for people to sell their organs. The text is directed toward medical personnel because it causes them to question, “what if”, organ sales legalized or what would they gain from this legalization? His article is also directed towards people in need of an organ, and organ donors. Gregory is successful when he uses logical, emotional and ethical tactics to persuade his audience on why organ sales would be beneficial. Some logical tactics Gregory uses to persuade his audience is giving the number of how many people die waiting for a transplant. He states, “...there are only about 20,000 …show more content…
Liberals like to say, ‘my body, my choice,’ and conservatives claim to favor free markets, but true self-ownership would include the right to sell one 's body parts, and genuine free enterprise would imply a market in human organs. In any event, studies show that this has become a matter of life and death.” (452) This would be considered a hasty generalization in logical fallacy terms. He has reached an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence. Research shows that Gregory himself, is a liberal. Although Gregory is a liberal, he is saying that all liberals think the way he thinks. Not everyone who has the same political standpoint has the same opinions, but it seems as if Gregory is speaking for everyone who is a
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
According to MacKay’s research, in the year 2000, “2,583 Americans died while waiting for a kidney transplant” (120) and according to Matas, “over 6% of waiting candidates die annually” (2007). "With over 60,000 people in line in the United States alone, the average wait for a cadaverous kidney is ten long years" (120). As the reader can see, MacKay is very credible with stating factual statistics in regards to the urgent need of kidney donations and she has Matas to back her up with similar statistics. These statistics show the reader that MacKay’s argument is a strong
Writer of "Perils and Promise: Destroy an Embryo, Waste a Life" , is U.S Representative Christopher H. Smith (Smith). Smith's article topic is about the research done using embryonic stem cells and destroying the embryo after instead of just using adult stem cells for research. He persuades his opinion to the reader in an extremely strong and aggressive tone. Smith makes excellent use throughout his article of all three elements of Pathos: appeals to fear and concern, appeals to emotion, and appeals to emotions and the need for self-esteem.
In the essay, “Organ Sales Will Saves Lives” Joanna MacKay elaborates that kidney failure is a major problem that has a possible, not so complex solution. Mackay believes that this issue could possibly be resolved if the legalization of organ sales were to be possible. In fact, her main argument throughout the essay is that government officials should not waste lives, but rather help save them by legalizing this process. Furthermore, she explains the dangers of the black market and how authorizing organ sales would benefit all parties involved. Overall, MacKay thoroughly claims that organ sales would ensure greatness for the recipient but also for the buyer; most importantly, she believed it would give someone a chance to continue living
The statistics really make people think. What’s the point in wasting organs that could help another human being stay alive? “We abide the surgeon’s scalpel to save our own live, our loved ones’ lives, but not to save a stranger’s life”. If we want to be able to help our own loved ones, we should also want to help someone else’s loved
The Choice of Life or Death Choosing between life or death is not a decision that you want to make. Of course pretty much everyone is going to choose life over death, but is some cases you don’t have that choice. In the article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives”, written by the author Joanna MacKay, she presents an argument about whether or not the sale of organs should be legalized. She builds her credibility by giving numerous facts, examples, and statistics on the argument. People die everyday waiting and hoping to get the call about finding a match for a kidney so that they can have a kidney transplant done.
I think the author did a superb job at getting her point across in such a structured way that the audience would not be confused by the use of terminology that they were not familiar with. She also still made sure that the audience was well informed through accurate statics of how many lives would be affected by selling organs. She also involved the audience by giving them a peek into the future, which allowed them to stimulate their own idea of how beneficial selling organs could be as well as created an empathetic feel when she discussed how many people that has and are currently
She discusses the case of Carl, a man who died while awaiting a kidney transplant. She describes how his family was left to mourn his death (Satel, 2001). By sharing these stories, Satel instills in her readers a sense of sadness and urgency, compelling them to consider the human cost of the organ shortage. Satel appeals to the emotions of her audience and makes a compelling case for legalizing organ sales by humanizing the issue and presenting the real-life consequences of the organ shortage. In her article "Organs for Sale," Sally Satel appeals to readers' emotions to emphasize the human cost of the organ shortage and the urgent need for a solution.
Throughout the article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives”, her thesis statement is clear. Joanne believes that people should be allowed to donate their kidneys even if people believe that it is “morally wrong.” Throughout her entire article she restates her opinion that people should be able to sell kidney’s without consequences. In the article, she states why people believe that it shouldn’t be legal as well as people who do believe that it should be legal. Most people believe that it shouldn’t be legal for one reason, that it is morally wrong.
She proves that the idea of achieving change by altering the status quo is not unfounded; it has worked in the past for organ donation and could work again in the future. Fattal clearly presents the study’s ideas by drawing a parallel to a similar
In Joanna MacKay's article, 'Organ Selling Will Save Lives", sides with the legalization of organ selling, due to her main focus she emphasizes on kidney failure. In ignorance of government, patients all over the globe are dying on the wait for a kidney transplant. She presents her ideas that government should not prohibit the sale of organs. She writes "lives shouldn’t be wasted they should be saved". Her thesis is understandable and she supports it with good reasons.
The act Donating Organs, either prior to death or after death, is considered by many to be one of the most generous, selfless and worthwhile decisions that one could make. The decision to donate an organ could mean the difference of life or death for a recipient waiting for a donor. Organ donations offer patients new chances at living more productive, healthy and normal lives and offers them back to families, friends and neighborhoods. Despite the increasing number of donor designations in the past few years, a shortage still exists in donors.
During the previous decades, society’s behavior with regard to organ donation remains reluctant. A survey showed that although people plainly accept to offer their organs for transplantation, when a person dies, his or her relatives often refuse donation. To be able
Ronald Faison Eng-106 February 20, 2018 Professor MaryBeth Nipp Definition Argument Essay The selling of human organs under U.S law is illegal for many reasons. By having bids on life or death situations can have a negative effect on people with low to no income waiting for an organ. The only lawful procedure for someone to receive an organ transplant as of now is to be placed on a waiting list. Human organs that are sold is considered human trafficking because it is the process of selling or transferring human tissue by force (National Institute of Justice, 2007).
Adding kidneys to the accepted list of organ sales can cause an uproar both good and bad, but may overall benefit those in need. The process of organ donations in the United States is an unstable procedure, but with the improvement in the system black markets can be stopped, awareness can be improved, and more lives will be saved. The effects and outcomes from those in need of a transplant are quite impressive. As of August 2017, 116,000 men, women, and children were on the national transplant waiting list.
The human organ selling market is often controversial. The idea of fighting for one 's country and dying could be considered heroic but in relevance to living or dead organ market, many individuals are discussed. The thought of selling a friend or family members vitals could seem horrid but also leaving their bodies to decompose could possibly be a waste of material that could have been tested to cure the disease that may have killed them. If one can sell or donate blood or plasma, what 's to say they could also sell an organ. Also, in relevance to the living and dead, if that individual does not need it then why would it be considered negative to make profit on it.