Irving Coffman Analysis

According to Irving Coffman in his passage, he stated that "manufactures of other legal but harmful products such as alcohol and guns, should also have to pay financial settlements in return for the problem they cause. " If tobacco companies will pay for the problems they cause. Then, most of the companies should also pay for the problems they cause to society. But we all know that if we use too much something, it will become detriment to us. So, why companies will pay for the fees in their damage? They are in business. And not just tobacco, guns, or alcohol companies have a legal but harmful products, but also fashion, technology, language and etc.

The subject of abortion has created some of the most controversial, social, and moral debates in United States history. On Jan. 22, 1973, in the case Roe Vs. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that it was a woman’s constitutional right to have an abortion during the first trimester of the pregnancy (The Ruling). Still other interest groups argue that human life begins at conception and having an abortion is murder to an unborn child. These opposing viewpoints create a delicate political and social debate in which the lives of unborn children are placed in the center. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the RU 486 “abortion pill”, citing that the “overall safety of the pill is excellent”(Food

The health warning on a package of cigarettes: This title could argue that cigarettes are a self-destruction weapon to humans.

The battle for reproductive rights began well over a hundred years ago. At a time when families were producing more children than they could afford to feed, many women were seeking primitive forms of birth control and undergoing abortions. It was in the 1860s that a postal inspector turned politician named Anthony Comstock, in partnership with the Young Men’s Christian Association, set out on a crusade to condemn all forms of birth control and any kind of abortion by claiming they violated “anti-obscenity laws” (Baer). These men eventually succeeded and created the Comstock Laws in 1873 that prohibited all “sales, advertising, or information on birth control” (Baer).

Birth control has been a controversial topic since the 1960’s, when the pill arose on the scene and gained popularity. Men and women of certain religious faiths have sought to prevent other women from using birth control. However, most women want to be able to choose when the time is right for them to have a child. This is why birth control is essential, because it allows women and couples in general the freedom to choose and plan their families. In many cases the need to control women by controlling their access to birth control goes all the way to the federal government. The federal government determines what types of birth control are allowed on the market and who has access to them. Some Presidential administrations look more kindly

There is a pill becoming readily available that would aid in reducing the amount of unwanted pregnancies. It is the "morning after pill" as it is being called. This pill can be used during the first three days after unprotected sexual intercourse to prevent the fertilization of an egg or the attachment of a fertilized egg to a woman's uterus. The question is not necessarily in the ethical issue of the pill itself. The problem or question lies in the issue of the pill being sold with or without a prescription. The measure would allow girls and women to obtain this medication, without a physician's visit or prescription and without parental consent regardless of the patient's age.

For both the pro and con sides these facts are presented in order to support each paper's opinions. One opinion of the pro side is that the market of cigarettes is a market for disease and death. At one point the paper states, "Outrage at an industry that has made billions selling sickness and death" the paper enforces this opinion later by saying, "For decades, Big Tobacco has made a profit by selling the instruments of disease and death." Another opinion is that tobacco industries are the only companies that manufacture a product which causes serious illness and kills. The pro side quotes Edward L. Kaven, author of Smoking: The Story Behind the Maze as saying, "the only industry which produces a consumer product that is likely to kill and render human beings seriously ill when used as intended." I believe that these opinions are exaggerated ones. First of all, the tobacco companies are not the only companies that sell a product that is unhealthy and even has devastating affects on people.

Coffman’s argument is stating that if tobacco companies are paying a financial settlement for selling harmful products, then manufacturers of other harmful products should do the same. I believe he thinks that it is only fair to make every company that is selling product with the same impact on people as tobacco pay as the tobacco company is doing. It makes sense in a way, because if this company is being charged for something that other companies are also doing, those other companies should be treated as their equal and charged for the same claim. Now,I think it is a sound claim to make in regards to these companies in particular because although the customers are buying the products and should be responsible consumers, the manufacturers are the ones putting the harmful products to their availability. It is like giving the customer a gun and ask only money in return such as the other companies are doing. They are making it easy for the people to harm their health and with gun marketers, to harm others by selling these products. I know it is a supply and demand world and if it is what the people want and what they will pay money

The Courier Journal analyzed how tobacco impacted the life of six Kentuckians: a farmer, a tobacco retailer, a cigarette factory worker, a smoker, a small business owner, and a cancer patient. The farmer argued that tobacco kept their family farm in business and that tobacco was no more harmful than coffee. The tobacco retailer talked about how his sales would fall if the price of a pack of cigarette was raised. According to the cigarette factory worker, she was intrigued by how the government would choose to spend the money that they would make from the taxes. The smoker argued that he had begun smoking when he was 9 years old and that teens would continue to smoke no matter what. The small business owner was concerned that her business would go under if farmers no longer had the money to spend at her store. And according to the cancer patient, she had been charged over $235,000 in medical bills. (Hopkins

Consequences also reach people nonsmokers who are exposed to smoke even involuntarily. Unfortunately, more than 126 million of Americans who don’t smoke are still exposed to the harmful effects of tobacco, whether in their homes by a family member who smokes, or on the streets and in public places by strangers who smoke (CDC, 2007). And the result of this exposure, can be seen in the data published by the World Health Organization (WHO) who reports that more than 600,000 million of deaths are a result of passive smoking, and in 2004, 28% of the children deaths were consequence of second-hand smoke in 2004 (WHO, 2014).

The movie, “Thank You for Smoking” is a comedy with a tobacco industry lobbyist, Nick Naylor as the lead. The movie has an eerie comic theme which tackles the serious issue of the addicting substance of tobacco, or to be more specific, nicotine. The idea which the movie was trying to portray was that this lobbyist was a great speaker who is able to manipulate many a feeble-mind. A lobbyist, to begin with, is one who is employed to persuade all-concerned of the employer’s concern(s), in this case, the marketing of tobacco products.

As stated by Eleanor Roosevelt, “One 's philosophy is not best expressed in words; it is expressed in the choices one makes... and the choices we make are ultimately our responsibility.” Everybody has a myriad choices in life. Some choices are better than others, and some are the worst choices one could have possibly chosen. The choices of one may work in one’s favor, or one’s choices may work in contrariety of one’s goals altogether. Electronic cigarettes, also called e-cigarettes or e-cigs, are an alternative choice to smoking actual cigarettes. Whether e-cigarettes should be regulated is a controversial topic among the people of the world today. A few people withhold the beliefs that electronic cigarettes should not be regulated as regular cigarettes are. It is possible that they believe that the regulation will lead to the prohibition or cease of smoking wholly. However, speaking as a candor person, one may say that these people are blind to the potential harms that the lack of regulation could create and that the lack of regulation may actually be causing electronic cigarettes to work in opposition of the purpose they are mostly used for. E-cigarettes are proven to not to have the same detrimental effects as regular cigarettes, however they are potently harmful, with different and serious consequences. The regulations would not be banning electronic cigarettes; the regulations are working to protect the health and well-being of everyone.

In “A Silence that Kills” Lyndon Haviland expresses the idea that the public must confront the social inequities of tobacco use. Haviland believes the communities must communitcate a sence of urgency and engage all Americans in the battle against tobacco use. The author expresses her ideas thoroughly by concentrating on certain fact of tobacco use or second hand smoke affect, the epidemic in out current communities, the silence of the government, and the concern for public health. With the constant repetition of unity and a well-organized, concentrated article, the author easily captures the attention of the reader and the intended American audience. However, the author lacks information on

The use of tobacco is a very controversial topic here in the United States. The harmful side effects of tobacco are well known and consequently, many believe that it should be outlawed. Though this has not yet occurred, constant regulations on the industry and

However our concern here is not only about the cigarette as a product but with the ethics of cigarettes as well, that affect the social process of marketing. This is because marketing process makes things worse and is also considered as unethical, and as a result has a significant negative impact on the societal welfare. Multinational tobacco companies apply sophisticated strategies ( such as putting flavor in the cigarettes and placing cigarettes in the shops near the sweets to make them more appealing) and invest huge amounts of money for marketing, in order to establish brand familiarity and future loyalty among young peoplem, to secure profits in the long run. 'The tobacco epidemic is a man-made international health crisis, created and sustained by multinational tobacco corporations.' (Yach, Brinchmann, Bellet page 2).