If ideology states that transfer of wealth is okay, and then you argue that you should also agree kidney transfers by the same logic, you have a straw man if de facto the ideology really doesn't agree that.
The original poster is trying to argue that certain people are being inconsistent so of course the majority disagrees with that.
The two others were my main argument which stand regardless of democracy, albeit enforcing them without similar system is probably not possible.
Alright, let's talk about those too then.
Reason of poverty and excess wealth in aggregate can be accounted for systemic unfairnesses in the economy. Interest is one mechanism that greatly favors those already wealthy. Reason for kidney failure, on the other hand, is mostly sheer bad luck.
What do you mean by unfairness? Is it fair that some people are smarter than others? Is it fair that some people can make millions of dollars because they are good at tennis? I agree but why is anyone owed anything because of this? Maybe you mean some other kind of unfairness.
Transfer of wealth can be done equally among certain group, organ transfers can't. Thus forced kidney 'donation' is against the principle of equality as all equal individuals don't have to donate a kidney, but one would have to go with random donors.
I don't understand what you're saying. Some people have to give more money than others, some none at all. Some people have to give kidneys and others don't. There's nothing exactly equal in either case.