Is taking blood from a blood bank less ethical than hunting?

[Lysander]

Religion and ethics or philosophy never give easy answers and it makes for good debates. Sorry if I offended about lumping all three faiths together and it’s easy as they believe in many of the same ideals.

[Gryffon15]

The mention of Judaism reminded me of a thread I had read once which I’ll share alongside this post. It may not be about the blood bank issue but it is an interesting account of one person’s discussion with a rabbi about what the appropriate conduct of a vampire might be.

https://www.tumblr.com/alternativetodiscourse/153238039722/animatedamerican-bigsis144

[Rhywbeth]

(Spam bot shenanigans)

[Rhywbeth]

Double post

[Rhywbeth]

The mention of Judaism reminded me of a thread I had read once which I’ll share alongside this post. It may not be about the blood bank issue but it is an interesting account of one person’s discussion with a rabbi about what the appropriate conduct of a vampire might be.

I believe I've also seen Muslim users tackle the question of if and how a vampire could exist and be halal, but I don't remember the details.
(I wonder how much time religious vampires have spent yelling at each other over religious law as it applies to their existence?)

Also the fact that a vampire isn't "alive" and from a certain perspective, has no life to preserve, may throw a wench in any arguments about how they're allowed to preserve it. Then again, undeath isn't death and they do have an existence, so it's down to personal opinion, I suppose.

The intravenous thing is interesting though, because this was brought up in the follow up conversation ("can vampires snort blood like cocaine?") Vampires don't eat blood, going by lore as written. The stomach doesn't operate, they just take the blood into their body and absorb it by osmosis, transforming it into vitae. So, theoretically, they don't need to take it in orally. Snorting it through a straw, or taking it through intravenous means should work, in theory?

(Also, am I seriously getting flagged for spam for simply posting in my own thread right now?? Really???)

[Rhywbeth]

Random question, why are we assuming that the blood bank in question is owned by and operated for mortal benefit?

If a blood bank is owned by kindred and operated expressly for feeding the local population, does that change the "morality" goal post? The mortals come in and donate blood just as normal, with no knowledge of how it would be used, sometimes with compensation. The only difference is that the blood is always given to kindred first and sent out to mortal groups second to maintain cover.

I think this boils down to whether you consider vampirism valid as a condition treated with blood transfers. If yes, then there's probably not that much of a problem. If no, then it's wrong because the vampires are stealing medical aid from people who need/deserve it more.

[Prometheas]

To play devils advocate.

1 - When hunting you're essentially forcefully sedating people and drawing blood donations from them without consent, like some kind of weird back-alley serial phlebotomist (also it's definitely assault and probably ABH or something). You're getting a blood donation anyway, so it's better to take from consensual donors.

Unless the person being extracted from is a willing blood doll. Then it would be a willing participant vs an unknowing donor. Their is an argument that blood donors generally don't know who their blood is going to, but it is being given with the understanding that it's being used to save lives. A vampire taking donated blood isn't having their life "Saved" in any real way(especially considering they're already dead) and they might be using that blood to Take lives, something the donors probably wouldn't approve of.

Also, If everyone Did know blood donations were being used to feed murderous vampires, there might be a sudden dip in blood donation numbers.

2- OK, but the people who went for the blood drive didn't consent to give their donations to vampires (cue argument about whether vampires count as patients who qualify for donated blood) Even if you get consent from a blood doll, since the bite is like giving somebody a dose of opiates to which they will become destructively addicted, isn't it unethical? (which then lead to a strange discussion about how to feed consensually without imparting the kiss, and something about drinking from humans with a straw which lead to the baffling topic of "can vampires snort blood like cocaine?".)

The kiss doesn't contain any opiates, or drugs at all. A better analogy would be sex, and we can all agree that Forcing that on someone is Very bad.

Pretending consent for such an action doesn't exist is also wrong though. After all, Should we also ban sugar considering it's proven to be more addictive than uncut cocaine?

[Rhywbeth]

To play devils advocate.

The kiss doesn't contain any opiates, or drugs at all. A better analogy would be sex, and we can all agree that Forcing that on someone is Very bad.

Actually, imo, it's a shitty analogy that gets on my nerves. If you want to use vampires as a metaphor for sex and rape, then it's a fine way to talk about the topic while skirting around it, but there is a world of difference between a metaphor and the literal thing. It's not sexual, as sucking the blood out of people is a) literally not a sex act and b) counterproductive to a sex act, considering you need that blood to have the functions to perform sex in the first place. (And the pleasure isn't likely to go to such a use by the vampire either, why would the beast waste the precious blood it just got on letting you get it up?)

Mind blowing pleasure is not limited to orgasms. Addiction is not limited to sex addiction. Also you want your prey to go limp and stay quiet, not thrash around and moan, drawing attention to you. It's an addictive, sedative feeling that stops you from being bothered by the pain of having your veins torn open and your blood sucked out. Sure sounds like opiates are the better metaphor to me.

Vampires have traditionally been a sex metaphor, and if you want the Kiss to be sexual, all power to you. But I firmly disagree on account of personal issues involving too many idiots making the jump of "vampires can be a metaphor for rape, ergo all vampires are committing literal rape!".

[Rhywbeth]

Double post

[Rhywbeth]

(I want the spam bot to know that I hate it.)

Actually, expanding on why I think the drug analogy works better at 10PM while I'm sleep deprived what am I doing (and also means a blood doll's consent doesn't really make feeding much better than nonconsensual feeding): You go to a club, and at some point some guy catches you off guard, and injects something into your veins that feels better than anything you've ever experienced in your entire damn life. Once it's in your blood, the guy brings out a syringe or whatever, and starts drawing your blood out. He drinks it, and shares the same high from your blood. You don't care, you're in heaven right now

Later you go home. Odds are your life is unsatisfactory, and that dose was the best thing ever to happen to you. Perhaps you have all that money can buy, and a hot wife and so forth. You have everything you want and the sex is mind-blowing, but it pales to what you felt at that club.

So you start hanging around trying to run into that guy again. You trade your blood for the high. You'll even let your entire life crumble around it because none of it could ever bring you such heavenly serenity as this.
That's the Kiss, to me.

Blood dolls consent to the Kiss like addicts consent to being extorted by their drug dealers. Their "consent" is... extremely dubious, and I always consider it a violation in my games

[ShovelHeart3]

I guess I'll just be honest: I disagree with even having this debate. If you're going to play a game about vampires, why not act (and think) like one? And that raises the question: what is a vampire? A vampire is a predator. It's an evolutionary weapon that directly draws its power from consuming humanity in a position of inherent superiority through violence and/or manipulation. So, to even begin with the ethical struggles at such a mundane point is ridiculous, imo. The vampiric ethos is inherently antagonistic and the humanity worship is absolutely one of the worst and most boring aspects of the game, again, imho...the fanged boy scout "personal horror" stuff is just so lame.

Tangent:
In fact, I wish there were penalties for being too high humanity - yeah, it makes total sense that you get all these cool powers from being a super-predator, but are somehow intrinsically the same person with a couple pointier teeth and a UV allergy. I think if your character is worried about who might not be getting their red bag, then you should have your disciplines capped at the first level or something to that affect. If you want to stay "human" as much as possible, why should you get the benefits of vampirism? You shouldn't.

Not trying to be too negative, it's just how I feel about it and status quo collectivism oversaturating everything.

[Prometheas]

Snip.

Thing is, we already have a mechanical drug metaphor. That's what the blood bonding and ghouling are for. Victims of the bond are literally mystically compelled to look for their next hit of back-alley vamp blood and Will ruin their lives over it if their supply is threatened.

Conversely, Blood dolls aren't compelled in any way to seek out the kiss and no one is likely to ruin their lives to get another(unless bonding/disciplines come in).

You also didn't seem to read the second part of my comment that clearified that the kiss is only bad If Forced. Someone consenting to the kiss is just as ethical as two consenting adults having a fling. It only gets abusive if someone Makes it abusive.

[Rhywbeth]

Thing is, we already have a mechanical drug metaphor. That's what the blood bonding and ghouling are for. Victims of the bond are literally mystically compelled to look for their next hit of back-alley vamp blood and Will ruin their lives over it if their supply is threatened.

Conversely, Blood dolls aren't compelled in any way to seek out the kiss and no one is likely to ruin their lives to get another(unless bonding/disciplines come in).

You also didn't seem to read the second part of my comment that clearified that the kiss is only bad If Forced. Someone consenting to the kiss is just as ethical as two consenting adults having a fling. It only gets abusive if someone Makes it abusive.

I did read it, and I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying I (personally) reject vampires as a sex metaphor because I don't think they're a very good one, so I didn't have anything to say to it in that context. Yes, in your context consent is fine and dandy. I like my drug metaphor, ergo it's irrelevant in mine. I'm not arguing your point, per se, I'm just presenting an alternate interpretation in which your point would not apply.

I once heard from a heroin addict about the time she and her boyfriend (who liked cocaine) were both high and he just decided to slice her shoulder open with a razor blade and start drinking the blood while she just lay there and watched him, too blissed out to give a damn. That, to me, represents the Kiss way better than sex. Because you're not passively sitting there having a kinky good time, somebody is deliberately putting you into a mentally altered state where you can't care while somebody sucks out, at best, a litre or two of your blood. Then you start deliberately looking for these people, despite the fact that it's harming you, because it feels so good. Again, I can see the risky casual sex metaphor, or even a BDSM metaphor, but you can see how it can be used the other way, right?

You can have more than one drug metaphor, and more than one way to exploit a junkie. As the hunger and the Kiss are definitely metaphors for addiction on the vampire's end, and the Kiss is literally a pleasurable sedative but not literally sexual, I'm continuing on the opiate addiction metaphor. I'm also sure I've read Blood Dolls described as being addicted to the kiss, though I admit a quick cursory flip-through is not bringing it up, so perhaps that's simply my headcanon. (nevertheless, as far as I'm concerned the Kiss is just sharing a hit and, as addictive things don't have to be chemical, it's very easy for me to imagine blood dolls becoming dependent on vampires.)

---

Tangent:
In fact, I wish there were penalties for being too high humanity - yeah, it makes total sense that you get all these cool powers from being a super-predator, but are somehow intrinsically the same person with a couple pointier teeth and a UV allergy. I think if your character is worried about who might not be getting their red bag, then you should have your disciplines capped at the first level or something to that affect. If you want to stay "human" as much as possible, why should you get the benefits of vampirism? You shouldn't.

Moral Nihilism and Moral Relativism are also perspectives you can take on the issue. I do enjoy a good Sabbat or Independent game.

This bit reminds me more of Requiem than Masquerade though.

[Matt the Bruins fan]

Tangent:
In fact, I wish there were penalties for being too high humanity - yeah, it makes total sense that you get all these cool powers from being a super-predator, but are somehow intrinsically the same person with a couple pointier teeth and a UV allergy. I think if your character is worried about who might not be getting their red bag, then you should have your disciplines capped at the first level or something to that affect. If you want to stay "human" as much as possible, why should you get the benefits of vampirism? You shouldn't.

Many discipline powers consume vitae at the higher levels, so there's already an implicit cap to what powers an extremely ethical vampire can use even if there's not an explicit one. Every time you merge with the ground or boost your strength to move that refrigerator away from the entrance to your hidey hole, you're using up blood that could have gone to a trauma victim in an ER. That's before you even get into how sinister most of the higher discipline powers are in terms of what they do to people.

[MyWifeIsScary]

IIRC, A good deal of donated blood is wasted. It's a perishable thing that's difficult to transport, you get too much sometimes and not enough other times.
On an individual level and In the best possible circumstances, direct feeding can be better than taking bags, but in 98% of cases it's clearly more ethical to take bags unless we start working under the assumption that blood bags drastically increase the volume of blood necessary or we know for sure that there's a shortage of bags, and I'm firmly in the camp that says Blood bond is just as good as true love, so I say this despite of my usual leanings. However, on a macro level, if all the vampires in the city decided to go for bags rather than live food, a lot of people needing transfusions are going to die, moreso than by regular hunting.