In these short passages, the reader would be informed about the diet issue in America for the past couple of years. Even though, everybody else may have a different opinion and in that way I have chosen to defend on not putting restrictions on what people can and can’t eat. My main reason for this choice is that, people should have full control of their bodies whether they mess them up by eating bad or drugs. In another case, they may work them out too much to the point where they pass out or heart attacks and other problems. I have always believed in freedom and happiness and if this makes people happy then that should be fine.
I can understand both sides of this argument, but with the society’s argument opposing the government’s decision …show more content…
Even though, it would be smart to ban these foods, people would be overall healthier and the country would be better. This argumentative passage at least makes citizens more conscious of what they eat and should keep these ideas in mind even if the decision doesn’t take place. It worked for me and the people I know that read these passages.
The choice to shut down and get rid of big soda makes sense and is smart for New York because their citizens are probably one of the biggest targets in the “need of dieting” community. In fact, research says New York citizen’s health has gone down majorly in the past couple of years. Although, these certain people seem to be happy in their own freedom of eating what they want and do what they want to their bodies. These people should have freedom of use of their own bodies and lives just as since they have the freedom of speech, it’s the law.
These are my arguments to these pre-made decisions. These passages are very persuasive and helpful to people of need of a point of direction. It even informed about this issue and made me think about how I truly feel about this topic. I never got the chance to think about this issue before, I didn’t even know this was an issue. This was my argument and I hope everybody can understand my
I can understand both sides of this argument, but with the society’s argument opposing the government’s decision …show more content…
Even though, it would be smart to ban these foods, people would be overall healthier and the country would be better. This argumentative passage at least makes citizens more conscious of what they eat and should keep these ideas in mind even if the decision doesn’t take place. It worked for me and the people I know that read these passages.
The choice to shut down and get rid of big soda makes sense and is smart for New York because their citizens are probably one of the biggest targets in the “need of dieting” community. In fact, research says New York citizen’s health has gone down majorly in the past couple of years. Although, these certain people seem to be happy in their own freedom of eating what they want and do what they want to their bodies. These people should have freedom of use of their own bodies and lives just as since they have the freedom of speech, it’s the law.
These are my arguments to these pre-made decisions. These passages are very persuasive and helpful to people of need of a point of direction. It even informed about this issue and made me think about how I truly feel about this topic. I never got the chance to think about this issue before, I didn’t even know this was an issue. This was my argument and I hope everybody can understand my