The Issue
Recent reports revealing that the dental health of Raarbia is far below the regional average have ignited a fierce debate over whether to introduce fluoride to the nation's tap water reserves.
The Debate
1. "Fluoride has been shown time and time again to promote dental health," argues Dr. Edwin Namel, Chairman of 'Friends of The Teeth'. "It's not an experimental drug for heaven's sake, it's an accepted method of promoting national good health. A nationwide program for the fluoridation of drinking water should not be seen as optional - it's a no-brainer for any sensible government. We need to implement this now, whether the public want it or not."
This is the position your government is preparing to adopt.
2. "I am strongly against this proposal!" rages Dave Johnson, one of the more vociferous members of the Raarbia Green Society. "When I turn on the water tap I expect to get just that. Water. Nothing else. We are not lab rats and it is not the government's place to force us into taking these chemicals! In fact I reckon we should put the brakes on all these new chemicals doctors keep pumping into people and give us the right to say no!"
3. "There's no need to go to either extreme," says Naki Broadside, your personal dentist. "It's all about, um, choice. Here's a nice alternative: why not just have clean non-fluorinated drinking water and give more funds to dentists? If we had enough money, we could make all dental care absolutely free! It will be demanding on the taxpayers I know, but they'll surely be happy when they all have sparkling white teeth!"
The Government Position
The government has indicated its intention to follow the recommendations of Option 1.
Which one is the most dictatorial?