Hey everyone I need your help!
I have an oral presentation on smoking but I dont know what my topic for smoking should be?
It needs to be an arguable question,
for example:
Should smoking be banned completely?
Should smoking be banned when driving?
etc!
Please help, I am absolutely blank, I have no idea what to do!
2007-03-15 10:15:30 · 8 answers · asked by Bianca 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Go beyond the ban. push the envelope:
A person can enlist in the military but may not be old enough to buy tobacco in some places. Should the law be changed?
Is it ethical to use underage "decoys" in sting operations involving cigarette sales to minors?
Should smoking be outlawed in homes where children are present?
Who is liable when a person chooses to smoke and contracts an illness from smoking?
Are smoking laws a violation of a person's right to choose?
Does increasing taxes on tobacco products decrease the risk of children smoking?
Use the opportunity to make people think, especially you. And have some fun too.
2007-03-15 15:50:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you want a more general question you could do Should smoking be banned completely. If you want a less general question you could do "How smoking affects the lungs/heart"(we just learned about that it science class) "how smoking causes lung cancer/toungue cancer/other cancers" or you just do a general "How smoking affects the body." There are many topics to choose from.
2007-03-15 10:25:37 · answer #2 · answered by smelie_ellie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Compare the right to smoke to the right to listen to opera. Like this:
Statistics have shown that Opera music costs the government hundreds in Medicare costs for hearing aids. Numerous studies have shown that frequent exposure to notes above e flat cause some hearing loss in 23 % of listeners by the time they reach 90 years of age. The only solution is to either outright ban opera music, or to tax it out of existence.
Do you see how, #1: Statistical facts and figures can be used to sway public opinion, even if they are not representative of the whole truth, and, #2: Being offended by something is not, in itself, justification for taking away the rights of one group to satisfy another?
2007-03-15 11:12:12 · answer #3 · answered by Lesley M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
second choice sounds better...Because driving and smoking is kinda driving and talkind in the phone...Completely? I don't think is a good idea..Can't happend...You can smoke the longs you are away from people that doesn't smoke and around a home that you are buying...Rented I don't recommended because it will leave a bad smell and is a smell that botters and ofcourse no healthy...I never smoke in my life and I don't care if people do smoke but just be away from my face or t close because it really does botters me...So not can't be completly It won't never pass such thing...
2007-03-15 10:24:44 · answer #4 · answered by nena_en_austin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You should used the Should smoking be banned completly. But pick a side....yes, because its isnt fair to nonsmokers,health, stikyness. OR No, it is the right of the smoker to smoke in a bar, outside, etc.
2007-03-15 10:20:51 · answer #5 · answered by Bad Answer Queen 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Try "Should smoking be allowed at all in public places when passive smoking is more dangerous than active smoking?"
2007-03-15 10:21:14 · answer #6 · answered by easyrecognition 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Does damage from second hand smoking fit under unintentional assault from the smoker? In other words, should you be able to sue someone for smoking near you if you do not want them to, if it can hurt your lungs?
2007-03-15 10:21:18 · answer #7 · answered by Ryan L 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
try having smoking with children in the car/home be a topic. that should be a crime.
2007-03-15 10:21:47 · answer #8 · answered by smartie 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋