Blog 36

             So my paper is about whether or not science is going to cross the moral line one day. Now I need to somehow come up with a personal anecdote and a theoretical situation for it. Alright, so for my personal anecdote, I can describe my experience with two of my previous friends. One died almost 7 months ago from accidental overdose, and one has almost died three times from repeated carelessness and overdose. The first friend is at peace and left as is. The second person, not so much. I have witnessed him being repeatedly shocked back to live and injected with adrenaline. Each time he has suffered endlessly and only been drawn back to addiction with no real help from the doctors. Simply, “Oh, we brought you back, you hurt, no money for pain meds, hope you get clean, here’s some resources you won’t use, get out.” And so he goes home, does more drugs to numb the pain, and goes right back to dying and being resuscitated. When is enough enough? I am not putting the blame on anyone here, nor disregarding that this person is at fault for ODing. However, why keep bringing him back and then letting him suffer alone? Why do we have to resuscitate every single time, every person, no matter what? That’s a personal experience that I thought might connect to my topic. Theoretically? Now imagine that science really has crossed the line, and I bring my first friend back to life. Hooray, I’m happy, his moms happy, he’s back! Right? But wait; now he’s a rotted misshapen creature who was forced to return to life when maybe he was already at peace with being dead. For those of us who are religious, what if he had made it to heaven? Why the hell did I take him away from that? Scientific discovery or better yet, selfishness? Some things should be left alone by man. Science is great, and should be explored, but it also should have boundaries and standards set.