Science Saves Lives
...ssay about cloning. She makes a good approach on discussing cloning. She is in favor of cloning research for medical purposes, and has reasons for this. She lost one of her friends to cystic fibrosis. Later, scientist discovered a way to cure the disease with gene therapy. This was discovered due to cloning research. Postrel presents her side by making a good point about the benefits of cloning and how it could affect you. In her essay, she writes about two sides, medical and science, but makes a point to tell why the medical reasons are the ones of importance. That science should not be allowed to continue research except for medical purposes. She makes contact with the reader, making the reader realize that they could be affected by cloning. It could have been you that had a friend that died. One realizes that cloning may help to save one that you love in the future. Kilner has a different approach. He is against cloning for religious reasons. Not to say that religion is a bad reason to be against cloning, however, he presents his side in a way less affective than Postrel. Kilner seems to base his points on the movies. Movies are fiction. They are made for reasons other than describing the effects of cloning. Kilner’s discussion of the movies was not an affective one. Kilner then moves on to discuss God’s position for creating humans, and why they should not be created in a science lab. He tells of how God never intended for human...