Order:
  1. Ethics, Organ Donation and Tax: A Proposal.Thomas Søbirk Petersen & Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 2012 - Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (8):451-457.
    Five arguments are presented in favour of the proposal that people who opt in as organ donors should receive a tax break. These arguments appeal to welfare, autonomy, fairness, distributive justice and self-ownership, respectively. Eight worries about the proposal are considered in this paper. These objections focus upon no-effect and counter-productiveness, the Titmuss concern about social meaning, exploitation of the poor, commodification, inequality and unequal status, the notion that there are better alternatives, unacceptable expense, and concerns about the veto of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2. Immigrants, Multiculturalism, and Expensive Cultural Tastes: Quong on Luck Egalitarianism and Cultural Minority Rights.Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 2011 - Les ateliers de l'éthique/The Ethics Forum 6 (2):176-192.
    Kymlicka has offered an influential luck egalitarian justification for a catalogue of polyethnic rights addressing cultural disadvantages of immigrant minorities. In response, Quong argues that while the items on the list are justified, in the light of the fact that the relevant disadvantages of immigrants result from their choice to immigrate, (i) these rights cannot be derived from luck egalitarianism and (ii) that this casts doubt on luck egalitarianism as a theory of cultural justice. As an alternative to Kymlicka’s argument, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Indirect Discrimination is Not Necessarily Unjust.Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 2014 - Journal of Practical Ethics 2 (2):33-57.
    This article argues that, as commonly understood, indirect discrimination is not necessarily unjust: 1) indirect discrimination involves the disadvantaging in relation to a particular benefit and such disadvantages are not unjust if the overall distribution of benefits and burdens is just; 2) indirect discrimination focuses on groups and group averages and ignores the distribution of harms and benefits within groups subjected to discrimination, but distributive justice is concerned with individuals; and 3) if indirect discrimination as such is unjust, strict egalitarianism (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark