This question is about the article "Choosing a Warning Label for Human DNA"
Answer and Explanation:
The author presents two types of optimists regarding how other planets and other species would receive samples that would promote the existence of human beings on these planets.
One of the optimists says that it would be necessary to inform the "extraterrestrials" that they received our species, that we are highly dangerous, invasive and that we have a strong potential for destruction. This optimist believes that this would place us as great warriors and necessary beings when problems arise.
However, another type of optimist, prefers to show our sense of community, our delicacy, sentimentality and kindness. Showing our hosts that we are complex beings, but capable of loving and being loved.
In view of this reading, we can see that the author fits into the second group of optimists, because he stimulated our most intimate nature, showing that if it is stimulated, it can overcome our negative points.
You pick a nice place you think would be nice for a dog park, then you describe how the space looks and some problems you may have for it being there.
Answer:
I would say that yes government should provide health care.
Explanation:
Start off your first paragraph with your opinion and add one reason. An example would be, Government should provide health care because reason 1. Discuss reason 1 in the first paragraph. For the second paragraph start the same way, I think government should provide health care because reason 2. If you have text then include quotes. In one of your paragraphs include a counter claim. Basically say, Some people may say government should not provide health care because (insert reason). Then say, this is not a realistic reason because..... At the end of your first paragraph write a transitional sentence such as, government has many other reasons to provide health care or something along that line. At the end of your second paragraph write a concluding sentence. For example, government should provide health care because reason 1 and reason 2 prove that it would be beneficial. One reason you could use I thought of right away was so that people are able to care more about helping their child, significant other, mom, dad, etc get better than worry about how much money the life saving procedure is going to cost. A reason you could say to not provide health care, is that insurance would most likely fight procedures more and it would be difficult to get treatments because if everyone can now get procedures they need for free, some people may not be accepted because they are not in as dire of circumstances. Overall, a general rule of thumb I use is pick the side that is easiest to support not what you necessarily agree with.
