That's not right. If there's an organ available and a recipient in need, it should be used rather than wasted. Regardless of the recipient's donor status. But donor status can be used as a tie-breaker.
My comment was meant to be absurd, as a counter-argument. Nearly every argument against opt-out can be turned back against itself in this way.
To be clear, I wasn't arguing against the British out-out approach; it seems mostly OK, too, and it is silly to make the perfect the enemy of the good.
There are different colors to different approaches, and they're going to have varying degrees of success in different cultures.