Definitions

Ought - Morally Desirable

Presume - to accept legally or officially that something is true until it is
proved [or shown] not true
Consent - to give assent or approval
Organ - a differentiated structure (as a heart or kidney) consisting of cells
and tissues and performing some specific function in an organism
Procure - to get possession of: obtain by particular care and effort
Just - treating people in a way that is considered morally right
PRO
Value
Justice; In 1861, John Stuart Mill published an essay entitled, Utilitarianism.
He described justice as something that will benefit the good of others.
Criterion
Enforcing that organ procurement is humane and beneficial to the society.

Contentions
As a just society, it is humane to save the lives of others.
1.) It is beneficial because there are organs in satisfactory state, not being
used. As stated by the Organ Donor Network, One organ donor can save up
to eight lives. The same donor can also save or improve the lives of up to 50
people by donating tissues and eyes. More than 120,000 people in the
United States are waiting for organ transplants. On average, 18 people die
every day while waiting for organ transplants in the U.S., and every 10
minutes, another name is added to the waiting list. We can use their organs
to save the lives of other people.

Justice It benefits groups of individuals.
2.) Justice is brought this way. I will state this again John Stuart Mill stated
that justice is work that benefits persons in a society. The organs will
benefit the people who are dying out there. This program is also not biased
on fame and ranking of people in the world. The National Health Society
keeps a record of what organ a person is lacking and how severe the need is.
Having an organ transplanted brings justice this way because gratitude is
shown in the patient. Organ Procurement is non-profitable and saves the
lives of other people just because they want to.

3.) Rights between the deceased and the living
The end-goal of a right is to protect the interest(s) of a right-holder. If I have
a right to bodily integrity, it is because I have a vested and justified interest
in preserving my body's wellbeing. I can be harmed, and therefore I require
protection against possible harms; rights function as those protections. Yet,
a dead man cannot be harmed in any physical sense--in fact, it could be
asserted that he cannot be harmed at all. What impact does it have on him if
his organs are removed? Since he is dead, he no longer has an interest in his
bodily integrity since his reason for that interest (a desire to stay alive and a
desire to be healthy) are gone. Whereas, a living person still has an interest
in their health and wellbeing the assure them a right to their health and
wellbeing--a right recognized in such documents as the Article 25. [7]
Therefore, the supposed rights of a deceased should not trump the rights of
a living person, as the latters interest is far more important that the formers,
and as the latter as a better claim to the organs from a rights POV than the
former.

Thus, we can also affirm the resolution from a rights-based perspective.
However, this contention is ancillary to the foregoing arguments, as--of
course--we are preferring a utilitarian weigh mechanism in this round.
concerning Transplantation of Organs and Tissues of Human Origin
addresses this in its Article 17.

CON
Mandatory Choice is a better system for those that choose to opt-in/opt-out
1. Mandatory choice is a much better system for presumed consent.
Presumed consent means that the approval is true until proven otherwise.
Mandatory choice is a method of requiting competent adults to
prospectively register their wishes regarding organ donation in advance of
death through various registration mechanisms.
Individual Rights vs. Privileges ( Rights of a deceased person)
2. A right is defined by Blacks Law Dictionary as a power, privilege, (sic)
faculty, or demand, inherent in one person and incident upon another the
powers of free action. Please note that rights are inherent in a person. I
define a right as something you can do without asking for permission. The
opposite of a right, therefore, is something you cannot do without asking for
permission. Any time you need permission to do something it is a privilege.
Blacks Law Dictionary defines this as a particular and peculiar benefit or
advantage enjoyed by a person, company, or class, beyond the common
advantages of other citizens. An exceptional or extraordinary power or
exemption.
In this case, the act of obtaining organs from another is a privilege and
permission must be asked to obtain it. Unless, you want rights to be
violated. The surgery success is about 90%.What happens to the 10%?
Remaining family members will have the right to give the privilege of organ
procurement of his/hers deceased.
There should be a compensation for those that want to donate organs for
money.
3. Let me clarify that there are people out there who are willing to donate
organs for free and there are people out there who sell their organs in order
to make a living. A single kidney has a black market price of $20,000.
Consequently, the sale of organs will highlight and support the most
egregious discrimination between rich and poor. Those who cannot afford
to purchase an organ will have no opportunity to receive one. What family,
if prepared to donate the organs of a relative, would decide to decline a
payment of tens of thousands of dollars?
Donated organs will disappear. The poor will die and only the rich will
survive. The black market works in one directionfrom the Third World
to the First. The relative absence of regulation and the comparative value of
the rewards mean that healthy individuals in Asia and Africa fall victim to
scavenging organ merchants. The financial rewards make the decision to sell
an organ one of compulsion rather than consent. The sale of organs will lead
to appalling human rights violations. Chinese judicial officials are reported to
execute prisoners for their body parts. The lawful sale of organs would
legitimize human sacrifice.