Analyzing Maura Dickey's Article 'Who Will Save The Savior'

438 Words1 Page

Doing what consequenally hurts the least of people is ethics. The article “Who Will Save the Savior” by Maura Dickey, does not do the right actions by highlighting the importance of not having a savior sibling ; the artical, “Mascots” shows the commonly practiced hypocrasy and racism; the song “Independence Day” by Grechen Peters isn’t exaclty ethically right either.
Initially, using spare organs is ethically wrong because it is taking away from the infants life and health. In Maura Dickey’s artical it describes the scientific notation to the society of what a savior sibling and the use of taking gentically designed organs out of one and using them for an other. Out of context this violates human decencey and also is morlally wrongfull of doing to a person that isn’t able to state his/her own actions yet. By doing this action it is consequentally wrong doing of a person to have a savior but this also shows the reasoning being of infants that are being talked about and knowing that they can’t have a voice of opion for themselves. There for consequentally wrongfully done.
Furthermore, schools shouldn’t be looked down upon for use Native Americans as a mascots. In Phil Hands cartoon informs the society of the breaking issue of racism upon the minority or also seen as the Native Americans as well, Hands origanally and specifically …show more content…

On a stand point being the mother was thinking consquentially out of the ethics

Open Document