Writing Feedback / Culture diversity in the host country [2]

Some people believe that visitors to other countries should follow local customs and behaviour. Others disagree and think that the host country should welcome cultural differences.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Opinions are divided on whether foreign tourists should behave in accordance with local culture or the native country should embrace other cultures. Although adapting local lifestyle could help people gain enormously, I think that cultural diversity should be prioritized.

On the one hand, many people claim that complying with local customs and behaviour may generate more significant benefits. To begin with, visitors can broaden their knowledge about the world. This is because of their precious opportunities to immerse themselves in exotic practices of native residents. Besides, it could help people avoid misunderstandings or inappropriate behaviors. For example, in Vietnam that people must not wear revealing clothes in places of worship because of disrespect, which is relatively familiar to Western visitors.

On the other hand, it is believed that multicultural environment brings a wide range of advantages to both host country and its residents. By embracing new cultures, the country could gain friendly and tolerant impression. As a result, it may be offered a prospect of increasing foreign tourists, thereby boosting the national economy. Meanwhile, cultural differences could lead to innovation, which benefits the local. Accordingly, exposure to modern thoughts may result in new customs being adopted and backward ones being abandoned.

In conclusion, both sides of the argument have its merit. However, it seems to me that it would be more advantageous if nonnative travelers follow their own cultures.

Writing Feedback / Children should be strictly controlled, this asserts by some parents and teachers. Others disagree. [2]

Children should be strictly controlled, this asserts by some parents and teachers. Others disagree.

Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion.

Opinions are divided on whether some parents and teachers should strictly manage children. While many people argue that it could be better to put children under control, I myself believe that it is essential for children to behave without regulation.

Supporters of this suppose that the supervision of parents and teachers may be beneficial for their children. They could provide children with proper educational methods and good orientation. This is because they are not only richly experienced but also well-qualified. Therefore, children could be prevented from bad habits as well as meet the standards of behavior. For example, they may not cheat in exam as being learned lessons about honesty from adults.

On the other hand, their control may trigger substantial drawbacks on children. To begin with, parents and teachers tend to cope with the prospect of their children being unconfident and passive in their work and life due to being over dependent on others. As a consequence, they could never go out of their comfort zone and obtain crowning achievement. In addition, negative reactions can be provoked when children are not allowed to do what they desire. In the long run, they could develop anti-social behaviours such as violence, alcohol abuse, bullying and so on.

In conclusion, both sides of the argument have its merit. However, from the above analysis, it seems to me that it will be better if children are not under supervision of parents and teachers.

Writing Feedback / The decision of whether pregnancy termination should be prohibited or not [2]

Recently, abortion increases rapidly and becomes a controversial topic.
Some people suppose that abortion should be legal while others are against it.

discuss both views

When it comes to the decision of whether pregnancy termination should be prohibited or not, opinions differ among people. Although it may have some negative effects, I believe that it is more advantageous if they allow abortion.

On the one hand, abortion ban has a good influence on individuals and society. It is such a dangerous procedure that the mothers could be put at high risk for some health problems like infection, bleeding, heart diseases, and so on. Even if the operations are conducted legally at hospitals with high expertise doctors and good medical conditions, these risks are just minimized, not wholly disappear. Furthermore, pregnancy termination is considered to be murder. As life is likely to start at the beginning stage of pregnancy, putting an end to it means killing a person.

On the other hand, this method should be legal for some benefits. To begin with, abortion can help prevent women from poor living conditions when they are not in a position to give birth to their children. Some may suffer from financial problems due to unemployment and the responsibility to pay for baby nurture expenses such as milk, clothes, or education. Whereas, a large number of teenage moms, especially in the least developed countries like Pakistan, will be forced to leave school and get married early, which could drive them to a future of joblessness and poverty. Moreover, abortion could save women from mental breakdown, depression, or even suicide in case of unintended pregnancy, for example, as a result of rape or forced marriage. Another advantage is that it ensures the rights of women to make decisions about their bodies. As the unborn baby in the womb is a part of the mother's body, no one other than women can ultimately decide whether to bear or not.

In conclusion, it seems to me that abortion should be permitted to enhance life's quality and guarantee the execution of women's rights.