171–180 of 199 posts
The report this is referencing is available here[0] The tribunal was setup, for what it is worth, by a campaign group called: "International Coalition to End Transplant Abuse in China"[1] [0]: https://chinatribunal.com/final-judgement-report/ [1]: https://endtransplantabuse.org/
We changed the URL to that from https://www.sciencealert.com/our-worst-fears-about-where-chi... .
Thanks!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn’t one lead to the other? I mean, that is why organ harvesting of condemned prisoners is so distasteful in the first place: it creates a huge conflict of interest in the dispensing of justice.
Not necessarily. For one thing it depends on consent. There is nothing wrong with a condemned person to consent to organ donation, if there is meaningful consent to be had. One would think that even China has some compunctions about "creating" capital crimes in order to have enough organ donors. One of the problems with the underlying story is that the non-consenting donors must have been killed somewhat "extrajudici…
A hard line stance on China’s human rights abuses, currency and trade manipulation, and intellectual property theft will be a top requirement for my support of 2020 US presidential candidates.
While I'd imagine you'd ignore U.S. abuses and provocations, (Iran?), I imagine? Is China worse than Saudi Arabia for example? Because I can't imagine U.S. speaking strongly against KSA, can you? The U.S. doesn't really care about human rights, or its own abuse of them, (was any top official prosecuted for Iraq?), so you'd be voting for posturing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
See, this is pretty typical of how the Chinese are told about their own government’s abuses in schools and media: “but what about the other guy?!”. It’s just not a valid argument. It serves only to change the topic and justify nationalism.
> It’s just not a valid argument. It's not a valid argument for the Chinese to justify their practices, you are right in that. It is a valid argument for critics that are (collectively) guilty of similar abuses, however. In this case: why make China's abuses the issue of your vote instead of your government's abuses? The US government has limited power over the Chinese (and so your vote has even less), but it has ful…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can't go too far with this logic, though. Nobody's perfect yet I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone reflects on themselves, finds out they aren't perfect themselves, and just passively watches human rights abuses. It is absolutely vital that we do improve what we can and start with ourselves but we should not get carried away with that idea to a ridiculous degree. Someone who has committed crimes can…
Certainly, that is a theoretical possibility. Note that I'm not suggesting ignorance and passivity. I prefer this route: 1) get your house in order before you try to fix the world 2) start with small, achievable improvements 3) be just in your judgement. > Someone who has committed crimes can and should still speak out if someone is committing something absolutely abhorrent in plain view instead of remaining silent.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Certainly, that is a theoretical possibility. Note that I'm not suggesting ignorance and passivity. I prefer this route: 1) get your house in order before you try to fix the world 2) start with small, achievable improvements 3) be just in your judgement. > Someone who has committed crimes can and should still speak out if someone is committing something absolutely abhorrent in plain view instead of remaining silent.…
I think most countries criticizing this don’t have an active organ harvesting and internment camp operation against ethnic and religious groups, though. I would rather compare it to a drunk driver judging a serial rapist, at least if we’re going to look one decade or so into the past.
That's true, though I have a feeling the "guests" at the US black sites would've preferred to be transferred to Chinese Gulags. Were Libya, Iraq or Syria drunk driving accidents? I suppose we might disagree here.
Everybody always claims they do the terrible things they commit to make the world a better place tomorrow. Who you support in their doings and who you call a villain is up to you. I suppose if HN was created in China and majority Chinese, most here would argue differently.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s just not a valid argument. It's not a valid argument for the Chinese to justify their practices, you are right in that. It is a valid argument for critics that are (collectively) guilty of similar abuses, however. In this case: why make China's abuses the issue of your vote instead of your government's abuses? The US government has limited power over the Chinese (and so your vote has even less), but it has ful…
Again, more whataboutism. The topic at hand is the PRCs unlawful harvesting of organs from ethnic and religious minorities, and the genocide (yes, genocide, read the report) this represents.
If you're going to potentially violate human rights and set up incentives to murder people for profit, saving lives like this is the best reason to do it. The long waiting lists for organs in the US show that our choice is a tradeoff, not a best practice. Insofar as our system is caused by squeamishness and the desire to feel morally pure, it is harming people unnecessarily too.
This is possibly the most psychopathic thing I've ever read. It belongs on https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitHNSays/
1. China executes a lot of Falun Gong and Uyghurs. We consider this genocide.
2. China takes their organs after they're dead without asking.
If you are reading me as "it's good to do (1) to get (2)", that would be very psychopathic of me. I didn't mean to say that.
What I had done while reading was entirely discard everything in the article about (1) because it was breathless and wasn't performed in order to get the organs. Then I attempted to make a comment on (2). Even (2) by itself is questionable, and I know I could be judged just for my opinion on that. But I didn't mean to get everyone riled up. Sorry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most countries criticizing this don’t have an active organ harvesting and internment camp operation against ethnic and religious groups, though. I would rather compare it to a drunk driver judging a serial rapist, at least if we’re going to look one decade or so into the past.
> I think most countries criticizing this don’t have an active organ harvesting and internment camp operation against ethnic and religious groups, though. That's true, though I have a feeling the "guests" at the US black sites would've preferred to be transferred to Chinese Gulags. Were Libya, Iraq or Syria drunk driving accidents? I suppose we might disagree here. Everybody always claims they do the terrible things…
Not saying the US shouldn't address and improve their own record of human rights abuses, and indeed address those that are currently ongoing (such as the detention of immigrants without a trial), but claiming that they have no business criticizing the ongoing, orders of magnitude larger Chinese human rights abuses is going to make the world a worse place.
It's important to realize that this isn't what the Chinese government is capable of, it's what governments are capable of. It can't happen here overnight, but it can happen here. Just look at the otherization and dehumanization increasingly embraced by people across the political spectrum, and dial it up to eleven. This should give people at least sympathy, if not agreement, with gun rights advocates. While private g…
(Note this is not an argument against gun ownership, just an argument for better education and having more children.)