Reply to two peers paper

Hello Christina,
I agree with you on the decision by Nicole to leave the planet against the set rules as well as taking Hannah with him was an act of self-centeredness and a betrayal to the community. In fact, he did not act in the interest of the society since it was his only obligation to protect it. However, he was in his right for personal choice and more so to act in his best interest. I would also want to disagree with you about the disregard to the society’s collective right. All people in the society have equal rights and need to be protected by the local government. Despite the established rules not to leave the planet or allow others to come in, Nicole decided to look for an alternative way of survival that will help the community be on safe position.
Reply to Wilnise,
Hello Wilnise, I agree with you that ending the life of an embryo‘s life due to disability is a violation of human right to live. It is an inhuman act that is meant to infringe the right of people. Therefore the persuasion by Starfleet to continue with the action does not seem right in the concept of the individual’s rights. However, according to him, it was of the best interest of the society since the action would reduce bidden to the community as well, as the families of individuals who are physically disabled. Refusal by the individual to comply with the project would, therefore, mean a violation of the society’s right to remain safe and free from the overburdens from the people with disability. The moral of the action, however, is generally questionable in the colony.