匿名使用者
匿名使用者 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

英文高中請進.請你寫下意見喔!!(20點)

In the late 1990s,several U.S cities voted to ban smoking in restaurants and bars. The main reason for doing this was public health. The action was controversial because smokers felt discriminated against. Some activists believe that barring smokers from these public establishments is not the only solution to the problem. In fact, they propose establishing separate areas for smokers and nonsmokers, installing advanced ventilation systems, and using other measures. However, the ruling to ban smoking in public places is now a law...

請看完上面那篇文章..寫出自己ㄉ感想和想法!!謝謝!!!

已更新項目:

要用英文寫出感想...謝謝你門喔!!

2 個解答

評分
  • 1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    As a non-smoker, I obviously support such legislation banning smoking in restaurants and bars.

    While restaurants have always had non-smoking and smoking sections, most restaurant-goers know that being in the non-smoking section does not mean that you're not susceptible to second-hand smoke. Whenever you go to a bar where people are allowed to smoke indoors, your body and clothes inevitably smell terribly after you leave. As a result, it is not difficult to understand why most non-smokers would be in favor of such smoking bans.

    At the same time, smokers and some activists argue that smokers are being discriminated against; in colder cities, smokers resent having to stand outside in the freezing weather just to have a cigarette. However, most people are not sympathetic to the inconvenience that the smokers experience. First, since smoking is hazardous to our health, most would agree that it is better for everyone, smokers and non-smokers alike, that fewer people smoke. Second, non-smokers can easily make the counterargument that their rights of preserving their health are significantly more important than the smokers' desire to smoke indoors.

    Several states that have passed the legislation so far also base their rationale on ensuring the healthy environment of work places. Since bars and restaurants are undoubtedly work places, proponents of the smoking ban argue that states certainly have the authority (and should) prohibit smoking in these places. A constitutional challenge on the authority of the states to pass such legislation would be futile. Courts have consistently given state broad policing powers, especially when relating to public health.

    2005-11-12 16:59:57 補充:

    feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

    • 登入以對解答發表意見
  • 匿名使用者
    1 0 年前

    請問 寫出感想看法 是要用英文嗎?

    • 登入以對解答發表意見
還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。