Question

people should not be allowed to go on hunger strike.give your views either for or against the statement. 

i have to write an argumentative composition on the above statement.

thank you.

Answer 1

A hunger strike is a method of non violent resistence or pressure in which participants fast as an act of political protest or to provoke feelings of guilt in others, usually with the objective to achieve a specific goal, such as a policy change. Most hunger strikers will take liquids but not solid food.In cases where an entity (usually the state) has or is able to obtain custody of the hunger striker (such as a pridoner), the hunger strike is often terminated by the custodial entity through the use of force feeding.in the 1st three days the body is still using glucose . after that, the liver starts processing body fat, in a process called ketosis after three weeks the body enters a "starvation mode".At this point body "mines" the muscles and vital organs for energy, and loss of bone marrow  becomes life-threatening. There are examples of hunger strikers dying after 52 to 74 days of strike.I personally feel that there is nothing wrong in people going on hunger strikes provided the reason for which they go on a fast is for a good cause. Hunger strike is perhaps the most non violent way of getting one's wish fulfilled. The people who go on hunger strikes do not eat any solid food but they live on a liquid diet for days and weeks. The Father of our Nation, Mahatma Gandhi also went on hunger strike. Gandhi was imprisoned in 1922, 1930, 1933 and in 1942. While in prison, he went on hunger strike. While the hunger strike inflicts pain and weakness on the person who does the strike, it will automatically create a sense of guilt to the opponent. As far as I know, hunger strikes are far better than wars which causes loss to so many people. Wars lead to deaths and irreparable losses to many. But hunger strikes aren't that invasive...

Answer 2

Answer:

The history of hunger strike has become a powerful medium of struggle or we can say another form of blackmail, says Nitesh.  “While on hunger strike, one has a lot of time to study the theoretical basis and practical implications.  As it goes by saying- History is in itself a guide! In India, hunger strike is an ancient practice, since it appears in the Ayodhya Kanda (the second book of the Ramayana) and in pre-Christian Ireland; hunger strike was used as a method of protesting injustice where it was known as Troscadh or Cealachan.”

yes people should go on hunger strike

It's better than violence.

 

Hunger strikes do not affect anybody except for yourself. First of all, it's better than violence. Hunger strikes are your choice, so it only affects you. It may kill you, but it doesn't kill others. If you want to kill yourself through a hunger strike, go ahead; as long as it doesn't kill other innocent people who wouldn't want to die.

Hunger strikes can lead to health issues, however they were proven to be a very effective method of getting politics listen to people. For this reason, if one feels passionate about something, they should most definitely be allowed to so that their cause is at least considered within political parties.

l feel people should be allowed to go on a hunger strike because they have the right to demand their rights in a non violent method. If they feel that they lack a particular facility, then they can go on hunger strike