A has attracted much social concern.

S + suggest that it is crucial for sb + to

V. Personally, I totally approve/disapprove of this suggestion. (Do you
agree?)

On one hand, what draws much of my attention is NOUN PHRASE 1. It

cannot be denied that A is synonymous with …(N). On account of (N)/
Thanks to this (N), S is/are likely to V____. In other words, S stand(s) a
golden chance to V _____. As a result, S + have/has the tendency to V +
________. This, in turn, leads to the fact that S + V ( are able to/are bound
to). || More interestingly, A provides sb with sth____. As a matter of fact, S
+ be capable of + Ving_____. By this means, there is likelihood for sb to do
sth. This makes it possible for sb to do sth. Given these points, A greatly
contributes to NP1.

On the other hand, some people might say that S + V (too, greatly, badly,
worsen(V)). As a consequence/ The end result is, S +completely prevent sb
from doing sth (it creates huge burden on sth). However, this is only
applicable to a minority. S has/have already VPII (planned, scheduled, well
thought about the plan). There are certain Ns (principles, rules, regulations).
Furthermore, it should be considered as N/ that S + V. S have the inclination
to do sth. Thanks to this, S to be given the opportunity to do. Beyond any
doubt, S bring about sth for sb. This results in N. By and large, the idea that
+opponent point+ is often possible to end in collapse.

In a word, NP1 and NP2 are the convincing reasons for my

approval/disapproval. It is highly recommended that S + should take my
writing into great consideration to make appropriate decision on N.