First of all, to clarify, any and all statements I make are with the basic assumption that a system of universal healthcare exists. It is the state of affairs I am used to, and I realize it probably has a non-insignificant impact on my opinion on the matter. Notions such as paying a medical professional to help me are alien and revolting to me on their face. Healthcare is a basic right that should be entirely independent of financial means, as I see it - and where I live, it thankfully is.
Now, here is what I am struggling to reconcile, Smapti: I cannot reasonably see how you can consider organ donation morally reprehensible enough that you are not willing to participate in it even after death (where, quite frankly, your physical body is of very little use to you, and not long for this world anyway) and reconcile that with the willingness to receive an organ. It reeks of special-casing to serve one’s own interests to me, although I will gladly be convinced otherwise by a cogent argument.
Either organ donation is so revolting a concept to you that you are neither willing to receive nor give an organ under any circumstances (a position I can respect, if begrudgingly), or you somehow value your own bodily integrity post-mortem over the lives of others whilst at best indifferent to theirs when your own life is concerned. I do not see how the second position is internally consistent, and I do not see how someone who refuses blankly to donate their organs after death can be entitled equally to an organ as someone who does so willingly.