View Full Version : Есе по английски на тема "Should smoking be banned?&quo
imam ese po angl i e za 4etvurtuk.Trqbva da e s obem okolo 200-250 dymi,no tova ne e vajno.Pone da predam ne6to.Temata e "Should Smoking Be Banned?" Molq vi se pomognete mi
Lele hora napravo me razbivate :shock:
Първо искам да ти кажа, че ужасно много се ядосвам, когато някой потребител започне да прави коментари или да се репчи, защото не са му отговорили веднага на искането! Не забравяй, че и ние, които пишем тук сме нормални хора със своите задължения и проблеми! Не можем да спим на клавиатурата и да отговаряме на всяка молба! Да не говорим, че не намираме всяка тема в нета! Затова вторият ти коментар в темата беше излишен, дори нахален. Но за да ти покажа, че грешиш с отношението си, все пак ще ти помогна, дано си си взела бележка за другия път.
Заповядай:
Should Smoking be Banned?
It has become fashionable in the world today to condemn smoking. However, although I feel that smoking can be harmful, I do not think it should be banned completely.
Let me deal first with the positive side of smoking. First, smoking undoubtedly helps many people to relax. For some, it even improves concentration. Many people like to smoke before exams or when they are relaxing with friends.
A further point is that governments throughout the world make huge profits from levying taxes on cigarettes. This provides funds which are used for building schools, hospitals and other public amenities.
The tobacco industry also employs tens of thousands of people throughout the world, particularly in poorer countries like Zimbabwe or India. Without cigarettes, these people would have no jobs.
I would also argue that people should have the right to choose whether they smoke or not. People should not smoke in a room where there are non-smokers but surely they should be free to smoke elsewhere.
The arguments against smoking are well known. Smoking has been shown to be dangerous to health. Heart disease, bronchitis and lung cancer have all been linked.
A further issue is that smoking costs governments millions of pounds because of the large number of people who need treatment in hospitals for smoking related problems.
There is also concern today about passive smoking. Recent research has shown that non-smokers can suffer health problems if they spend long periods of time among people who do smoke.
In general, I think the world would be a better place without cigarettes. However, the decision as to whether to smoke or not should be for each individual to make.
Ето и друго есе по темата:
Should Smoking be Banned?
Why is it that countries everywhere want to ban smoking and related advertisements and also benefit from taxing its sales, both at the same time? The same goes for alcohol and other such commodities.
Smoking and drinking are universally prevalent habits. That itself is the biggest argument against any such bans. Why then would any lawmaker try to wipe it out?
The main motive behind such moves seems to be a paternalistic one – to protect others from harming themselves. As adults our personal habits are chosen by us and we are solely responsible for them. It seems there is a tendency to consider the civil population as a group or community whose welfare one is responsible for. In fact, no one can hold another person responsible if somebody dies of smoking induced cancer, except that person himself/herself.
If the above is true, than why would anyone think of imposing such bans? If the victim is solely responsible for his/her actions, then why should such actions become a subject for regulations, unless they are considered harmful to others?
This last point has in fact been explored in case of smoking, and passive smoking is one argument made in favor of banning public smoking.
Several habits are a matter of personal freedom and these must be kept out of reach of bans and impositions.
A just point made by someone on the internet was that smokers do not continue to smoke due to lack of knowledge of its harmful effects. It at all it is, it is considered a vice. That is what motivates such bans.
Or is it that governments can’t tolerate anything more popular than themselves?!