Pesticides: Nationwide Ban

2029 Words9 Pages
Different people are committed to their own unique values and therefore react differently to a proposal that will likely have an effect on their lives; positively, negatively or simply indifferently. In order to convince an entire society of people that something is for the greater good, different areas of concern must be addressed in order to satisfy each member and their different values. A reduction and eventual nationwide ban on pesticide use will effect our society on both a social level and economic level, but it is the only option if we wish to live in a cleaner, safer world. The problem is that, as much as people value their health they also value their manicured lawns, an abundant food supply and low prices on their fruits and vegetables. The question is: do the positive effects of banning pesticide use outweigh the negative effects? The answer is yes. One does not have to look far to see that pesticides, though they keep pests off of our lawns and out of our farm fields, they are having extreme adverse effects on our health and the environment. By setting the positives of pesticide use against the negatives and observing the many alternative practices, one can see that we no longer need pesticides as a functional member of our society. Even without the use of pesticides, we can obtain harmony among the multiple objectives of society and nature, with minimal sacrifice and just a little compromise. What pesticides have done for our society is help us satisfy our material needs. One cannot assume that one day someone said “let’s spray toxic chemicals on our food so that the bugs don’t eat them” and everyone immediately agreed that this was a good idea. There would have had to have been a pretty good incentive. We live in an affluent society and an economically driven society and no one would disagree that we enjoy it. The underlying problem is that we are

More about Pesticides: Nationwide Ban

Open Document