Hey guys I'd love to get some feedback on my writing sample. My test is on Friday and I've only written like 3 of these w/ zero feedback! Help a brother out!
According to the statement, society as a whole makes its own decisions
regardless of the regulations that are imposed on it. This is painfully
apparent in the American chasm that is abortion. There are generally
two rivaling groups of advocates in said situation: those who strongly
oppose abortion and those who support the pregnant's right to choose
between abortion and pregnancy. Proponents from both sides are riddled
with personal values ranging from social/cultural to religious to
democratic, all of which play a significant role in the proponent's
position. The large majority of the U.S. states support the right to
choose and have declared their position on the matter by passing laws
which support abortion. However, national polls have shown that the
country's population is divided at nearly even numbers for both sides.
This exemplifies that, although a law was passed which obviously favors
one party of advocates, the other party refuses to change their social
values, and therefore, their position on the matter. As shown, the law
of the land was incapable of changing social values.
Still, imposed law is sometimes able to influence people's social values
and perspective on certain matters. This can be exemplified by the
legalization of marijuana in states such as California. Prior to
legalization of marijuana, many Californians were strongly opposed to
the usage of it and claimed that they would never use it. However,
since the legalization of the hallucinogen, polls have shown that more
people are willing to try the drug and even more accepting of its users.
Such polls suggest that the legalization of the drug has convinced a
significant amount of Californians that it is acceptable to use
marijuana since the government has allowed for it.
There is a fine difference between the two opposing examples given here.
The statement holds true when the situation at hand is largely dictated
by the society's personal values and how deeply said personal views are
seeded in the society. The deeper these values are seeded in the
society's character as a whole, the more difficult it is for the law to
have an influence on the society's social values. Opponents of abortion
have strong religious ties that they believe they must support. As a
result, their strong religious beliefs and values refuse to allow them
to accept abortion as a socially acceptable option. It is understood
that religious values are some of the most deeply seeded values and
possibly the hardest to persuade. On the other hand, it is safe to
assume that the perception of marijuana usage has been received by the
general public as a subtle misdemeanor. This is exemplified in the
movie and music industries as well the attention it got during the
1970's. The acceptance by the role models within said industries and
the constant references made about marijuana use in the 1970's has
blunted the negative perspective of marijuana. As a result, the values
which the Californian society held in regard to its use, although
negative, was not as concrete or as steadfast as the values which
dictated society's position on abortion. Thus, when a higher authority
such as the California government allowed for the usage of marijuana,
society was able to make their values susceptible to influence and as a
result, changed their social values on the matter of marijuana usage.
According to the statement, society as a whole makes its own decisions
regardless of the regulations that are imposed on it. This is painfully
apparent in the American chasm that is abortion. There are generally
two rivaling groups of advocates in said situation: those who strongly
oppose abortion and those who support the pregnant's right to choose
between abortion and pregnancy. Proponents from both sides are riddled
with personal values ranging from social/cultural to religious to
democratic, all of which play a significant role in the proponent's
position. The large majority of the U.S. states support the right to
choose and have declared their position on the matter by passing laws
which support abortion. However, national polls have shown that the
country's population is divided at nearly even numbers for both sides.
This exemplifies that, although a law was passed which obviously favors
one party of advocates, the other party refuses to change their social
values, and therefore, their position on the matter. As shown, the law
of the land was incapable of changing social values.
Still, imposed law is sometimes able to influence people's social values
and perspective on certain matters. This can be exemplified by the
legalization of marijuana in states such as California. Prior to
legalization of marijuana, many Californians were strongly opposed to
the usage of it and claimed that they would never use it. However,
since the legalization of the hallucinogen, polls have shown that more
people are willing to try the drug and even more accepting of its users.
Such polls suggest that the legalization of the drug has convinced a
significant amount of Californians that it is acceptable to use
marijuana since the government has allowed for it.
There is a fine difference between the two opposing examples given here.
The statement holds true when the situation at hand is largely dictated
by the society's personal values and how deeply said personal views are
seeded in the society. The deeper these values are seeded in the
society's character as a whole, the more difficult it is for the law to
have an influence on the society's social values. Opponents of abortion
have strong religious ties that they believe they must support. As a
result, their strong religious beliefs and values refuse to allow them
to accept abortion as a socially acceptable option. It is understood
that religious values are some of the most deeply seeded values and
possibly the hardest to persuade. On the other hand, it is safe to
assume that the perception of marijuana usage has been received by the
general public as a subtle misdemeanor. This is exemplified in the
movie and music industries as well the attention it got during the
1970's. The acceptance by the role models within said industries and
the constant references made about marijuana use in the 1970's has
blunted the negative perspective of marijuana. As a result, the values
which the Californian society held in regard to its use, although
negative, was not as concrete or as steadfast as the values which
dictated society's position on abortion. Thus, when a higher authority
such as the California government allowed for the usage of marijuana,
society was able to make their values susceptible to influence and as a
result, changed their social values on the matter of marijuana usage.
