Comparing Ban The Ban And Soda's A Problem But

In the documents "Ban the Ban" by SidneyAnne Stone and "Soda’s a Problem But..." by Karin Klein, the topic of the soda ban is being argued against. Both authors share their thoughts on this situation and provide evidence to support their arguments. They are both against banning soda, but the reasons these authors provide to support their claims are very different. So in this essay, I will show you the differences and similarities between the two authors and their viewpoints. The effectiveness of their arguments will be put to the test.
In "Ban the Ban!" by SidneyAnne Stone, the author does not like the fact that the soda ban is restricting the liberty of the citizens of New York. She claims that it is not morally correct to ban soda and that

Although Karen and SidneyAnne have similar claims, they both have different arguments against this ban. Karen believes that this ban is incorrect and should be removed; she thinks this because she sees a flaw in it. For example, in paragraph 3 of "Soda’s a Problem, But..." it says, "Convenience stores such as 7-Eleven are overseen by the state and would be an exemption, but a Burger King across the street would be restricted." This evidence demonstrates that there is a flaw in the ban because even though the ban has been placed, there are unfair exemptions that do not make sense—if soda were to be banned, why are there still exemptions? The soda ban would have little effect on daily soda consumption; only the revenue businesses make from selling these sodas would be affected.Another piece of evidence the author of "Soda" is a problem but... provides is in paragraph 3, which states, "That was an overreach that thwarted the system of checks and balances, according to the judge: The separately elected City Council would have to approve of the law." This piece of evidence shows another flaw or problem in this ban—this ban was carried out without the legal principles required and, therefore, should be revoked. The arguments that Karen Klein backed up her claim with were valid; there is no bias included, in contrast to what Sidney Anne believed. Because of this, Karen’s argument provides an

But whose argument proved more effective? And what was different between the two? Both authors felt as if their liberty and freedom had been stripped from them, but they express this idea in very different ways. In "Ban the Ban" by SyndeyAnne, she expresses this idea by stating her bias and what she thinks about the situation while never caring about the facts. In contrast, Karen Klein of "Soda’s a Problem, But..." backs up her claim without bias by using facts to prove how her argument is valid. SydneyAnne also never stopped to worry about counterarguments, which is a crucial part of writing an argumentative article. Without a counterargument, you are not disproving the other side of the argument, which could potentially prove the other argument valid. Karen, on the other hand, does provide a counter-argument claiming that she does not entirely disagree with the soda ban but also disproving it with a claim on how this soda ban won’t change anything as people will continue to find ways to access this fizzy drink due to human