We Must Ban Therapeutic Human Cloning Essay -- Argumentative Persuasiv

  Ã‚   The Senate is considering a proposal to outlaw human cloning. Two alternative proposals would ban only "reproductive cloning," which would mean explicitly legalizing human cloning but not the implantation of a clone embryo into a womb. Pro-cloners are willing for the most part to outlaw reproductive cloning because it isn't safe, but they oppose a ban on cloning for research and experimentation--known as "therapeutic cloning"--arguing that such a cloning license is necessary to the development of future medical treatments for human ailments. This opposition to a ban on human therapeutic cloning is misinformed.    The case against cloning, including therapeutic cloning, has mainly been argued on grounds of morality. Opponents have warned that creating embryos through cloning for the purpose of research (with the full intention of destroying them later) is a breathtakingly radical enterprise. For the first time in history, human lives will be created for the explicit purpose of exploitation. Such considerations have led activist Jeremy Rifkin to opine that the cloning debate is to the 21st century what the slavery debate was to the 19th.    Unfortunately, we live in a time of widespread and extreme non-judgmentalism, an era when many Americans simply do not respond to moral arguments in public policy debates. For these folk, what counts is not right versus wrong, but whether it will or won't work--in a word, utility.    Does this mean that the public policy amoralists among us must end up by default on the pro-cloning side? Not at all. There is increasing evidence that therapies based on cloned embryo cells would be so difficult and expensive to develop and so utterly impractical to bring to the bedside,... ...ork on embryos? The Red Cross representative could not have been clearer: "We really need to focus our resources, our attention, on those areas where we could most likely provide, in the shortest period of time, some therapies for our patients."    To pour money into human cloning embryonic stem cell research is to risk drilling one dry hole after another. The moral policy thus also turns out to be the pragmatic one. The United States Senate should vote to ban all human cloning now.    WORKS CITED: Civin, Curt I. "stem Cell Selection." http://www.stemcellselection.com/transwithselection/overview.htm Prentice, David. "The Truth About Stem Cells. http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/interrogatory022601a.shtml Odorico and Kaufman. Embryonic Stem Cell Research - a Reality Check. http://www.stemcellresearch.org/info/quotes3.htm

Napoleon and Snowball (Animal Farm) Essay

George Orwell’s Animal Farm is an allegorical novel that reflects events such as the Bolshevik revolution, the economic reform by Trotsky the Russian famine in 1921 and during the Stalin era before the Second World War. The pigs represent the communist leadership, and the rest of the animals on the farm symbolize the different parts of Russian society and how the communist takeover of Russia affected them. Two main characters, Snowball and Napoleon (who symbolize Trotsky and Stalin), engages in a political struggle, as both of them wanted to have the power to lead all of the animals. Although Napoleon wins the struggle in the end, Snowball’s political strategy is better than the corrupted leadership of Napoleon. Snowball cares more about the living condition of the animals. Compared to Napoleon, Snowball knows the meaning of â€Å"Animalism†, which is animals are equal and it should lead the animals to a better life. Snowball is interested in reading all kinds of books to enrich his scope of knowledge to make the animals work easier. For example, he declares the windmill idea from a book of the Jones. Also Snowball is very brave; he has studied the book of Julian Caesar and successfully led through the Battle of the Cowshed while Napoleon was hiding himself in the barn. Snowball has an intelligent and friendly character. Unlike Napoleon, Snowball never forces someone to agree with his ideas. Instead, he is good at explaining how his ideas work and persuades all the animals to believe and trust his ideas. Unlike Napoleon, Snowball does not need Squealer’s help, he can do the explaining part all by himself. Napoleon has his own ways to control other animals such as the dogs and Squealer but Snowball has different way which is the committees. Snowball seems to work better within the political system. Napoleon goes around it. Napoleon, for instance, he understands the role of force in political control and uses his attack dogs to expel Snowball from the farm. Napoleon seems to have a powerful, self-centered desire for control, while Snowball seems to think of himself as a genius who should be the one to guide the farm toward success. Snowball is the only one who knows the real meaning of â€Å"Animalism†, and he is putting out true effort to make the living standard of the animals better than before, and insists everyone is equal. After the expel of Mr. Jones, the Animal Farm is supposed to be democracy, all of the animals should decide how to do things together, any one animal to rise to greater power than any other would violate that ideal, and make Animal Farm indistinguishable from a human farm. On the other hand the only thing that Napoleon thinks about is how to gain more power and personal benefit from the farm. Snowball always comes up with some long-term plans and on the other hand Napoleon can only come up with some short-term plans. In conclusion, Snowball’s political strategy is better then the corrupted leadership of Napoleon.

The Symbolic Significance of Methuselah as It Reflects the...

Methuselah is a parrot character in The Poisonwood Bible written by Barbara Kingsolver. The novel is set in the late 20th century in a village of The Congo call Kilanga. Methuselah is a parrot who is left by brother Fowls for the Price family. He has been denied freedom for very long and has been kept in a cage. Later when Nathan Price sets him free, he has no idea what to do with his independence. So he keeps flying near the Price house and depends on the Price girls for food. When Congo’s independence is announced, Methuselah gets killed and eaten by a cat. The imprisonment and freedom of Methuselah can symbolize the current and the future conditions of the Price family as well as the colonization and independence of The Congo.†¦show more content†¦The Belgians had colonized The Congo for its natural resources like many other western powers at the time that â€Å"aimed for no more than have dominion on every creature that moved upon this earth† (10) as it is confessed by Orleanna at the beginning of the novel. In a very similar way, Methuselah was kept in a cage by the humans against its will only because it was a weaker creature. Just like The Congo, Methuselah is not allowed the freedom of speech as every time he says something, Nathan Price gets mad and inquires â€Å"which one of [the daughters] taught [it] to say that word† (76). In a similar way, The Congo is denied the freedom of speech and is not considered as a sovereign state. The effects of the colonization of The Congo can still be seen as the country could not cope up with it even after half a century. The country remains poor and divided as it is not used to work on its own and enjoy the freedom of living. The same happens with Methuselah after Nathan tells him that â€Å"(he is) free to go† (94) and grants him freedom. Methuselah had forgotten what freedom feels like and â€Å"it goes and then it comes back because its wings aren’t any count† ( 133). Because of this Methuselah cannot survive on its own and later he gets killed and eaten by a cat. Comparing Methuselah with hope Adah declares that she had found hope â€Å"fallen already† (185) and she adds that â€Å"a piece of it [was there] beside their latrine, one red plume† (185). In an act