Issue#3: Are Environmental Regulations too restrictive?
For some time, governments around the world have been putting some regulations concerning environmental issues. In this issue, the weight of these regulations is the main point. First argument states that they are, indeed, too restrictive. The second argument maintains those regulations are not too restrictive.
The first side, against regulations, did not present their argument well enough. They used examples from the past and only from a specific location (Theodore Roosevelt and the U.S.). The past is over, so we cannot use past as an example. Second, there are other parts of the world other than the U.S. The strongest argument was about economic and freedom interfering. The government is interfering with personal economical and freedom rights. The examples in the text are relevant enough (pg39, paragraph2). Personally, I thought their argument lacked evidence and did not make sense. The only logical argument they proposed was the one about aesthetics [A sense on aesthetics would get us…and harmless. (pg46, paragraph 3).] This argument is basically saying priests and propagandists should not affect scientific decisions.
