2 definitely. If 1 became the law, there would be a very heavy incentive to declare people dead, even if they might be saved if every effort were to be spared. It might not go as far as this, but it can be surprisingly hard to determine whether someone is actually dead, so giving people such a high reward for calling someone dead is not a great idea.

I'll go for 1 on this.

Ups. Thanks for the notice. Here's the resized version.

I was browsing the link you provided and ......Wut ? :
'
People: 5,992,474
Zombies: 0
'

WHAT are you hiding from us ???????

edit : and the issue of course, I choose 1. Even if there are valid arguments against, we can't have organs wasted by 'ignorance'. People may be allowed to NOT have their organs harvested under any circumstance, they just have to register themselves on a list to a medical center, every third month (something like that, everybody should be a donnor by default).

There was a zombie outbreak that ended completely a couple days before I started my own nation, which in turn was a few days before I started Gogan. The info panels haven't been turned off yet.

Some info here.

I'll go with one. Why let perfectly good organs rot in the ground or burn in a crematorium when they can be put to good use? Because someone else's imaginary friend says they can't? Fuck off.

I'm not sure about the choice, it feels like it's coming across as an all or nothing system. Does 2 represent a voluntary system or just no system whatsoever?

No idea.

Nationstates' responses can be a bit on the extreme side though. I expect the news headline for the decided "mine only a bit of the rainforest" to be "Gogan clears almost all its rain forest for new mining operation, Goglodyte population down 95%", which is only an "almost" away from "mine everything" (carefully balanced legislations have a tendency to become slippery slopes).

Issue 5: 1

Compulsory organ donation is a bit extreme, but it's still better than option 2. I wish there were more nuanced options to choose from, like the opt-out system JMich proposed.

Ahhhhh, damn, alright, guess I'll have to go with my impression of the question.

Issue 5: 1 - Assuming that what option 2 is talking about isn't any sort of voluntary organ donor program, then instituting one seems to be in our best interest. I'd prefer an opt-in or an opt-out (probably better) system to put in place though.

Actually, returning to this, I'm not actually sure if they become slippery slopes, or if it's just the media blowing everything up in proportion as usual. Can be interpreted either way, I guess.

I just saw the motto : 'We like it cheap and unprotected'

I laughed hard
....
but you could have slipped '...preferably old ... ' somewhere :)

Issue 5: 2

more freedom, get your ORM (organs rights management) out of here.

Issue 5: 1
Our games are DRM free, so are our organs dammit.

Issue 5 - 1

Given that those are the only two options, I'll have to go with 1, although I would also much prefer JMich's opt-out suggestion.