Banning large sodas is legal and smart Essay

Submitted By osiris156
Words: 920
Pages: 4

Argument Summary of “Banning large sodas is legal and smart”

“Banning large sodas is legal and smart” was written by Lawrence O. Gostin and was published to CNN.com on March 13, 2013. Lawrence discusses his approval of the ban on Sugary drinks which was put into effect by New York’s Mayor, Bloomberg in 2012. This ban was put into place to combat the growing Obesity epidemic which has “plagued” our nation for some time. The ban was targeted at non-alcoholic sugary drinks sold at movie theatres, restaurants, stadiums, and mobile food carts that exceeded 16 ounces in size. Lawrence argues that one of the major causes of obesity is “super-sized” portions. “Super-sized” portions enable a person to eat/drink more because there is more food in front of them. If they eat more food then that leads to obesity. Having smaller portions forces a person to eat less and feel fuller at the sight of a finished meal; if they eat less, they are less likely to become obese. Large drinks also contain a high calorie and sugar content. The high sugar promotes fat storage within the body and if a person continues to drink these high calorie drinks, then becoming obese is a likely result. Lawrence also argues that the Board of Health has an obligation to the US people to “act in cases where there is an imminent threat to health.” Since obesity is an epidemic, it is only reasonable for the Board of Health to exercise it’s authority over the food supply and limit the sale of these high sugar drinks to prevent this chronic disease from spreading. Lawrence’s last point is that New York is usually a starting point for large scale debates such as the smoking ban for indoor establishments. When a ban is established in a big modern city like New York, then it is more likely for it to spread across to every other city nationwide. Banning this epidemic in New York is one small step in the right direction to fighting the war on obesity in America.

Deductive Argument Response

In 1776, the “Declaration of Independence” stated that we all have “unalienable rights” which include a right to Liberty. Liberty means that we are “free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views “. As a US citizen this is a right that is bestowed upon us and we are allowed, within certain restrictions, to live our life the way we choose. This is the very reason so many of us choose to live in the United States. The Universal Rights declared to us are a staple in our history and every US citizen has full authority to take advantage of it without worry. When the US government decides to impose its authority on the way we live our lives, it can be seen as a violation to our right to Liberty. Since Liberty is a right given to us by the United States Constitution, taking it away or having oppressive restrictions imposed would be considered unconstitutional and illegal. There are many countries around the world which impose restrictions on their citizens. North Korea, China, and Saudi Arabia are some countries that come to mind that impose restrictions and heavily control what their citizens can and cannot do. The difference between those countries and America is that America guarantees certain rights to our citizens. These other countries do not give their citizens any of these universal rights and instead governs what they do. If the US begins to impose restrictions on what we and can’t do, it makes the US no…