WE hAvE a DeBaTe At ScHoOl and i WOULD LOVE ALL UR HELP, PLEASE!!?

We have debate agout organ transplants and we have secenario. this is it
Kevin, a three time scoring champion recentmvp of the nba who is 29 yrs old has recently been diagnosed with pancreatic cance and placed on a waiting list for an organ transplant. jason, a 31 yr old security guard has a similer dosorder and has been on the waiting list for 3 years. on OPO has just identified a pancreas that matches both jason and kevin. they are both equally ill. who do u think most probably willrecieve the organ and why?

i am supposed to be for the basketball guy, but i dont even agree with it, but tha'ts what the teacher gave me. so i would relaly appreciate any points that i culd use to support kevin getting the transplant. thanks a bunch in advance!!!!

the debate's on monday 1st period.

I do not agree either, but heck since it is a trivial debate, it's like science fiction, inconsequencial anyways....

Simple. Organ Transplant based on age. The younger the more deserving to get the transplant. A young person may likely have more years to go, than someone older. (think expiry date) If we start allowing the older person to benefit, the next thing we know, we may have to give a 90 year old the pancreas just because he waited longer. Now, that would'nt be fair isn't it? judging that the old man would unlikely outlive a 3 year old. Just an example.

Secondly, he benefits society by increasing and generating media publicity from all over the world towards his country, thus increasing tourism to the country and also expands the country's talent/recognition across the globe. SInce he's a star. Like a brand-status.

Tell the teacher it is not a matter of who deserves the liver (a subjective determination) but a decision based on need and immediacy. If both have the same need and immediacy then the Donor list controls.

You cannot argue a position that has no merit in law.

EDITED TO ADD:

Just so you know, I had such an assignment in 1968. I was assigned to defend the Montgomery Bus Authority when it ejected Dr. Vernon Johns from riding the bus. Their reason was he refused to give up his seat to a white man. This occured years before Rosa Parks.

I refused the suggested course assigned by the moot court to argue that segregation was legal. Instead I argued that a private company, which the bus company was at the time, had the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. This allowed me to win my case and not compromise my moral belief that segregation was not only wrong but illegal.

Sometimes you have to take a stand, regardless of the grade.

So you decide, what is more important. learning a life lesson that will guide you the rest of your life or a grade that lasts for a semester.

The decisions prooffered on what each brings to their country or society are based on tangible things or possessions. not on quality of life. Find an reason other than money or fame to base your defense on that will also preserve your moral fibre.

well, aside from this debate not happening in real life.

You could argue that Kevin, not only conributes more to society now, but is younger, so he will have more opprotunities to do so, compared to Jason.