help review it - smoking and freedom-argument
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:56 am
Many businesses now ban smoking from all offices and governments prohibit it in all public places. This is a good idea but it has restricted our freedom. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In the contemporary society, smoking is identified as unhealthy behavior. Most of the companies in the modern cities already not allow anyone smoking in the workplaces as well as governments restrict anyone smoking in the public areas. It is disagreed that this prohibition will limit citizen freedom. This argument will be analyzed by looking at how forbid cigarettes help residents to maintain good health and the interests and rights of society at large must override those of the individual.
First of all, it is irrefutable fact that cigarette is a drug. For instance, it has been proven that passive smokers will have serious health problems due to inhaling smoking. This makes it clear that smokers smoking in the public places will give numerous trouble to those non-smokers. As this shows that government has a responsibility to bar folks from the drug.
Secondly and even more importantly, smoking leads to lung cancer and other fatal diseases. The medical treatment for the smokers is usually incredibly costly, and it is frequently government and society that cover these costs rather than the individual smoker. Therefore, it is obvious from this that the interests and rights of major people are more significant than those minor individual smokers.
By way of conclusion, how banning tobacco can retrain people from a drug and protect the interests of the community at large, it has been proven that prohibit smoking will not curb human freedom. It is predicted that administrations and corporations should continue this policy.
In the contemporary society, smoking is identified as unhealthy behavior. Most of the companies in the modern cities already not allow anyone smoking in the workplaces as well as governments restrict anyone smoking in the public areas. It is disagreed that this prohibition will limit citizen freedom. This argument will be analyzed by looking at how forbid cigarettes help residents to maintain good health and the interests and rights of society at large must override those of the individual.
First of all, it is irrefutable fact that cigarette is a drug. For instance, it has been proven that passive smokers will have serious health problems due to inhaling smoking. This makes it clear that smokers smoking in the public places will give numerous trouble to those non-smokers. As this shows that government has a responsibility to bar folks from the drug.
Secondly and even more importantly, smoking leads to lung cancer and other fatal diseases. The medical treatment for the smokers is usually incredibly costly, and it is frequently government and society that cover these costs rather than the individual smoker. Therefore, it is obvious from this that the interests and rights of major people are more significant than those minor individual smokers.
By way of conclusion, how banning tobacco can retrain people from a drug and protect the interests of the community at large, it has been proven that prohibit smoking will not curb human freedom. It is predicted that administrations and corporations should continue this policy.