Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Since human beings tend to have tranquil life and have always sought peace to apply to their lives, some laws have been enacted by governments to put these demands into action, causing people to take steps toward fulfilling their desires in a specific and determined frame. Nonetheless, the questionable issue on which there is no collective consensus is whether the enacted laws nowadays that youngers have to obey are strictest in comparison to the past. Personally speaking, my viewpoint is in line with the ideas of those whose notions are that such laws are not as strict as in the past. This claim will be justified in the following essay. First and foremost, due to the advancement of science, especially psychology science, the laws made by official authorities of societies are easier than in the past. This is to say, in comparison to the past, laws enacted nowadays are so easier that they can be nothing short of a joke. Expressing a compelling example can help to a profound understanding of this concept. In the past decades, youngers had to wear a mandatory outfit not only at school but also at universities. These mandatory laws enacted by governments were so strict that students, in case defying, were occasionally encountered with severe reprimands such as eviction from the universities, while the new generations are so free that they are able to choose the type of wearing and clothes. Hence, it is not wrong to say that the laws enacted nowadays are so simple for youngers that they are nowhere close to the laws made in the past. Another reason worth mentioning is that the laws enacted by contemporary governments are so easy that not only are they strict by no means, but they also pave the way for youngers to fulfill their dreams. In other words, contemporary lawmakers, unlike the recent decades ones, consider the youngsters' attitudes whenever they are going to make a new law. To put it simply, gone are the days when the youngers' inclinations had no position in the lawmakers' thoughts; It mattered neither what youngsters' trends were nor whether the considered laws were in line with the youngers' lines of thoughts. For example, in some third-world countries, what mattered to capture a job vacancy was possessing high education so that they were incorporated into the families' priority lists. Having high education was so significant that it had superiority over anything else. In contrast, nowadays, the enacted laws by governments are so easy that youngers tending to be an entrepreneur can get a considerable loan with low interest from the governments even if they have no high education. By living in an advanced society, youngers can take advantage of its benefits so that the last generation never had such benefits. In conclusion, according to the reasons mentioned above, I am of the notion that not only the progression of the societies but also the changes created in lawmakers' attitudes toward youngsters lead to enacting easy laws. Hence, it can be said -without exaggeration- that the rigorous rules nowadays are nowhere close to those in the past.
Submitted by Vahid on