Mandatory Human Chip Implants Essay Example for Free

Mandatory Human Chip Implants Essay The idea of mandatory human chip implants is wrong on so many different levels. Not only is there a major concern about how it will affect the privacy of society, but also how much we don’t know about the adverse effects on the actual human body. Another major concern is the public backlash that can be expected from all religious bodies and communities. This is why we as a society must stand up for what we believe is right, and what is right is that mandatory human chip implants cannot and will not be tolerated. One of the biggest issues with mandatory human chip implants is privacy issues and concerns. Many questions immediately come up whenever the topic arises. What organization or body of government controls the data stored from these chips? Is the information stored in the chip safe and secure? Can my information be stolen and or sold? As of right now the only chip approved for humans in a medical application is the â€Å"Verichip†. The Verichip is a chip comparable to the size of a grain of rice. It is a fairly simple device that consists of only a coiled wire and a hermetically sealed microchip inside a glass casing. It uses the coil as an antenna to create a radio signal that is unique. This unique signal can be transmitted and received to identify a person’s medical records if they are in some sort of dire state in which they could not communicate efficiently.(Foster, Kenneth R. 2007,March) This could save so many lives in the medical field simply by pulling up a patient’s records and receiving this signal. In a perfect world this would work correctly and only for good intentions but, the way we as a society constantly strive to streamline every aspect of our life, where would it stop? The notion or idea is that it would replace driver’s licenses or bank atm and debit cards. Social security numbers, birth certificates, bank account numbers, basically your entire life. As technology continues to grow and advance, how secure can these chips really be? If someone was able to steal your signal they would be able to do so many things with the information stored in it. Your life would be stolen in the blink of an eye. Also, another terrifying realization is if the signal is stolen or locked on to, you could be followed or tracked. This is very unsettling if we cannot be sure how safe this information really is. Would you really want someone  to know where you or your loved ones are at all times? What if some sick individual was watching your child or children? The possibilities are endless in these scenarios. So with no guarantee on how secure the information stored in these chips really is, this is one of the many reasons why there should not be mandatory human chip implants. Another strong arguing point on this subject is health concerns. With these devices being as small as they are, there is not enough data to prove that they are not a health concern. There is lots of data about these chips that should raise some eyebrows, as well as the manner in which they were approved by the FDA. Back in 2005 when the FDA approved human chip implants they claimed with â€Å"†reasonable assurance† the device was safe. The one thing they failed to mention in that claim was that studies going back to the mid-nineties directly links these chip implants with cancer. Many studies and research showed that one in six lab rats developed tumors because of the implanted chip. So how could this slip by the FDA you ask? According to Lewan (2007), well back in 2005 when it was brought before the FDA for approval, the head of the Department of Health and Human Services at the time which presided over the FDA, was a man by the name of Tommy Thompson. Well two weeks af ter the approval of the chip in humans, Thompson left his position at the DHHS to become a board member of VeriChip Corp. and Applied Digital Solutions. Even though it was five months later, he was compensated with cash and stock options from the companies. Can we chalk this up as a coincidence? I don’t think so. With all the facts and research done on this particular subject I find it hard to believe that the FDA did not come across any of this information before approving human chip implants. So with the data already in front of us claiming to link these chips with cancer in lab rats, can we honestly agree to be implanted ourselves? Finally, the thought or notion of human chip implants would cause a huge backlash in our religious communities. Just recently in Virginia, there was a public outcry against mandatory micro-chipping that caused the House of Representatives to vote on the subject matter. Krunkle , (2010) wrote, Del. Mark L. Cole (R-Fredericksburg), the bills sponsor, is quoted saying My understanding Im not a theologian but theres a prophecy in the Bible  that says youll have to receive a mark, or you can neither buy nor sell things in end times, Cole said. Some people think these computer chips might be that mark.(p.1) In our society, religion is at times, a very controversial and touchy subject matter between religious communities. There will be millions of people who will become distraught if human chip implants become mandatory. Our country has so many different religious cultures that it would directly effect. Are we really ready for the consequences that will follow if this eventually happens ? In conclusion, we as a society need to stand up to what we consider right from wrong. So is it wrong to make someone have a chip implanted so they can buy or sell things in order for them to survive even though it goes against their religious beliefs? Or is it wrong for these chips to be approved for humans even though there is substantial evidence that it could cause cancer. The answer is entirely up to us. My conclusion is that yes, it is completely wrong. Not only does it violate our ethical privacy rights as human beings, it also causes so many concerns medically and spiritually. We cannot allow this to come to fruition. We have to stand up for ourselves and our beliefs and say no to mandatory human chip implants to protect our future generations to come. References Foster, Kenneth R (2007, March) The murky ethics of implanted chips. IEEE spectrum. Retrieved from http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~markhill/cs252/Spring2013/handouts/spectrum07_rfid_ethics.pdf Holtzman, David H (2008). Human ID chips get under my skin, BusinessWeek Online, 5-5(1). Krunkle, Frederick (2010). Human chips seen by some in Virginia House as device of antichrist, The Lewan, Todd (2007). Chip implants linked to animal tumors, The Washington Post Washington Post

The Vision of The Anointed :: essays research papers

The Vision of The Anointed When we think what the definition of Vision is we might think that vision is the ability to see the features of objects we look at, such as color, shape, size, details, depth, and contrast, and that vision is achieved when the eyes and brain work together to form pictures of the world around us. But when reading Thomas Sowell’s book, The Vision of The Anointed, one might have a different perspective. Thomas Sowell wrote this book to contest the vision of those who are the artistic activist of modern society. In chapter two that is titled, The Pattern, Sowell what is interesting about visions, what are their assumptions and their reasoning. He then discusses the various characteristics of patterns that have evolved among the anointed. The pattern of failure is then listed into four stages: The â€Å"Crisis†, the â€Å"Solution†, the â€Å"Results†, and finally the â€Å"Response†. During the chapter he talks about certain topics, such as the war on poverty and sex education, and broke each one down with the four stages. I had a particular interest on the topic of sex education. I agreed with Sowell about the â€Å"Crisis† with the sex education within schools. He mentioned hoe pregnancy and disease was done in the 60’s than it had been in the fifties. Usually when society makes a fuss, it could do the opposite affect than help the situation. It seems when sex education was permitted into schools, which more sex started to happen. Although that may have not been the intent, but unfortunately it did not help the problem, that was never a real problem. In chapter three which is titled by the numbers, Sowell discusses scientific evidence through data. He enlightens us on how to take facts and create them into valid theories. One fascinating subtopic was the â€Å"AHA† Statistics, where he describes how people find some numbers that fit their insights. In this chapter he focuses on how people get paid differently according to race, and gender. I do find this to be true. I agree that somewhere statistics by the anointed has proven that those tiny details (race and gender) have an affect on the way someone is paid doing the same work. I agree that facts and numbers are not entirely correct, but they are shaped and formed to me the anointed needs, and desires. In chapter four he discusses the irrelevance of evidence.

Judaism And Early Christianity Essay

Judaism and Christianity forms part of the Abrahamic religions where Islam is the third. They both believe in ancestral background of Abraham where they believe in the great covenant between God and Abraham. However, Judaism and Christianity posses both similarity and differences. They both follow suit the bible as the holy book. However Christianity has Sunday as their worship day while Saturday is for the Judaism. They both depict a close relationship in theological and historical backgrounds. However they posses substantial distinctions which emanate from the nature of their religious response. The basic similarities born to the Christians is because it came from Judaism. Its breakdown from Judaism however led to a totally different religion though sharing some specific characteristics. As much difference as occurring between the two, they are almost the same believing in the biblical teachings and a divine supernatural being. An important opening comparison between the two is that they belief in Abraham as their founding ancestor. To the Judaism however, they have a basic belief of all the religions as being God’s children whom therefore brings a sense of equality to them all. They have the believe of God’s love for his people but does not campaign on sole conversion towards Judaism for them to have salvation. In the same however, it welcomes those who wish to join this religion without hesitation of what would be their current religions background. (http://www. catholiceducation. org/articles/apologetics/ap0007. html) Generally, both can be argued as monotheistic which means the believe in one powerful God. However, as much as monotheism is a similarity of God, a difference exists between the two on the nature of this God. To the Judaism, God cannot be broken down into other parts. They thus believe in a sole and a full God. However, Christians have the sense of Trinitarian where God exists in God the father, God the son and God the Holy Spirit. Therefore, though sharing the perception of one God, a sense of incompatibility arises when the existence of God as a whole according to Judaism has a subdivided personality according to Christians. To Judaism, idea of one God brings the essence of unity and the unique nature of his force towards the cosmos. To them (Judaism) God is the sole creator of everything. They refer Trinitarianism as weakening the essence of God’s unity /oneness. (Diane, 1992) However, a contrast of view exists between the two in their view about Jesus. To the Christians, they have Jesus has a Central pillar in their religion. He is part of the God’s trinity. He is the Son of God and gives the revelation of God through the flesh. To then, the belief that Jesus is the incarnate God who existed in flesh and came to save the sins of man through his death. However, a different point of view exists in Judaism about Jesus. To them, Jesus was just a mere Son of God but existed like a general human being to them. He has no power of saving human souls and therefore did not rise from his death. He had no power of absorbing man’s sins. Forgiveness is what removes man’s sins but not atonement of Jesus. To the Christians however, he came to replace the dominant Jewish law which however is contrasted by the Jewish. A contrast also sexists in their view of Jesus as the Messiah. This is true to the Chriatianity. However, the Judaism has the view that Messiah will be unique human being who will bring liberation towards human piece. To them, Messiah exists only when the whole worlds gets into peace. However, Jesus’ era on earth could not provide this. To the Jews however, a different pedigree of understanding about Jesus as man exists. (http://www. catholiceducation. org/articles/apologetics/ap0007. html) A conception into the traditions of the original sin and the doctrine of a free will elsewhere exists between the two. To the Judaism, original sin is a mere mythology. They reject the aspect that people are born with sins, which can only be removed whenever they believe in Jesus in his sacrificial death. To the Christians, salvation is the only way in which human sins can be washed away. However, the Jewish has the view that man is never good nor bad at birth. Consequently, they possess both good and bad inclinations at their birth. However, to them is the aspect of free will from which they choose how to model their conceptions. Their morality is built on ethics, which grants them the opportunity for choosing what best to do at specific times in time. (Diane, 1992) A similarity and difference in life on earth and after death also exist. To both, lives after death is a consequent reality. To the Jews however, an importance should be attached to improving life on the earth, which is important in improving the status of the world. However, they never count on the importance of life after death. They argue on death as a component towards giving life its overall meaning. They belief that whatever life is taken after death is to the best interest of God. They however lack of a clear sense of hell and heaven. To the Christians however, life is death is real and is modeled in response to what extent a person had when a life. They belief on life after death for those who went after God’s teachings while a life. (Richard, 1983) It clear that monotheism, Abrahamism and biblical understanding are the basic ideologies that the two share in common. However, they a plugged into different understanding of how their sacred lives are undertaken. Reference Comparing Christianity & Judaism. Retrieved on 10th May 2008 from http://www. catholiceducation. org/articles/apologetics/ap0007. html Diane, W (1992) Christianity & Judaism. Blackwell Publishers Richard, W (1983) Christianity and Judaism. The Deepening Dialogue. Ridge Row Press

Heather Scoville - ThoughtCo