The article Who Owns the Past discusses cases of antiquities being taken from their original region

to museums in Western countries. In 1972, the United Nations passed a resolution banning the removal of artifacts from the countries where they are found. I agree with the UNs conclusion. The main reason I think artifacts should stay in the country in which they were discovered is that there is a risk of the objects being damaged or destroyed. Thousand-year-old sculptures, stones, etc. are usually fragile, and if not treated carefully, there is a high risk of harm being inflicted upon them. Also, countries economies can benefit greatly from the tourism that ancient artifacts bring in. Taking an antique from the place it was found is like stealing money from the government of the country. Lastly, There is a moral imperative for museums around the world to return certain artifacts to the countries they came from. Some of the antiquities being disputed have even been exported illegally and corruptly. Archaeologists and anthropologists should be ashamed that important artifacts that shed light on how humans lived thousands of years ago have been treated disrespectfully. On a side note I do not think this article conveyed the lesson you are trying to teach us. The question you ask us to answer is Which side has the stronger argument give at least three clear reasons to support you position. BE SURE TO CITE SPECIFIC EVIDENCE FROM THE ARTICLE. However the article does not discuss reasons why artifacts should be returned to the places where they were found, or reasons why they should be left where they are presently. I think the main idea of the article is not to give us two sides of the argument, but simply to inform us that antiquities were exported controversially. The closest thing to an expert opinion in this article is by James Cuno. He says Modern Egypt, for example, bears no relation to the Egypt of the pharaohs, and modern Greece is much different than ancient Greece. Their ancient artifacts are now really part of the common culture of humanity in which we all have a stake. Countering this argument is a statement by Hawass. There is a moral imperative for museums around the world to return certain artifacts to the countries them came from. This rebuttal is based solely on his personal opinion. Furthermore, the article does not go on to give any factual reasons why artifacts should be returned to the countries in which they were found, biasing the reader to the first statement, which more thoroughly explains the other side of the argument.