Technological Innovations example essay topic

In the realm of medical science, there have been and still are many different technological innovations, which lead to great controversy. Things such as abortion, artificial insemination, and even certain kinds of surgery that have proven successful for humanity have gone through much debate. Today, one of the hottest topics to be debated, just so happens to be one of these technological innovations. It is something that people tend to be either fore or against and not in-between. Human cloning, this current break through, is being discussed worldwide and is advancing in its use everyday. Many people, including myself, disagree with most types of cloning because it contradicts their beliefs.

Because there still are those that push for its advancement it truly is becoming one of the largest controversies of our time. Thorough out my life, I have developed beliefs that are based on what the Bible teaches us. Because of this, I have to disagree with any practice of human cloning. The cloning of animals and plants on the other hand do not bother me and I see nothing wrong with it. Since we are given the domain in the Bible to rule over the world, which are the animals and plants, the cloning of these things to help humanity survive is all right. The video that was presented in class on cloning gave many different world-views in support on cloning and only a few in opposition of it.

The one argument that I did agree with was from Russell Saltzman, a Lutheran reverend. The reverend could have benefited from therapeutic cloning but refused to take part in this sort of technology because of his beliefs taken from the Bible. He argued that in creating the embryo for this, he would be creating a life and then killing it simply for his own health. He shared the view that life begins at conception, and when an embryo is conceived and then used for its cells, it is the act of killing. Another small argument against cloning, which does not involve beliefs but money, is that not everybody will have the financial capabilities of using this technology. As it is, not everybody can afford prescription drugs to get over certain illnesses, this technology would only divide the human population for those that can afford it and those that can not.

Though I disagree with human cloning, there are those who might be dying of a debilitating disease, such as Christopher Reeve and Andrea Gordon, seen in the video, that agree with it. I believe Christopher Reeve said that he did not think it was right for one person to be deprived of something that another person has or to that affect. In his case it was the ability to walk, breathe, and eat on his own. Because of this, he supported therapeutic cloning. In a way, he is contradicting his own argument. Because he believes nobody should be deprived of something another person has, he should disagree with therapeutic cloning.

Through this type of cloning, he is depriving that embryo the right to live by killing it for its use in aiding him. Therefore, he himself is killing a human in order for him to live. The same goes for Andrea Gordon, in order for her to go on living she needs to kill an embryo, or person, to keep on living. The issue of cloning is important because it has an impact on different aspects of our laws. To a certain degree, the issue of human cloning comes down to those who are religious and believe in the teachings of the Bible, and those with a world-view that do not acknowledge the Bible.

If there becomes a public policy of human cloning being illegal, then abortion should also become illegal because an egg or embryo is killed in abortion. Because cloning in general is not necessarily bad when it pertains to plants and animals, we need certain standards or laws to abide by in order to safely advance with this technology.