Ok, I will ignore the extremely bad grammar and sentence structure, and comment only on the points the author was making.

However there are definately positive viewpoints inside of a plague. A plague can rid society of disease causing microorganisms. It can cleanse the earth from toxic dangers. It can also decrease the population size. [...] A plague is a useful way of destruction among the world's society."

Hahaha, I just love how he says "A plague is a useful way of destruction among the world's society."

"A palgue is morally and ethically wrong in every way. It is murder of the first degree and there is no argument for that fact."

A plague is morally wrong and murder in the first degree? Is this guy mixing up real humans with microorganisms that are just fighting for survival as much as humans are? A plague does not happen on purpose, a plague does not kill people intentionally. Nowhere do I see him mention anything about plagues being used as a biological weapon. Is the reader to infer this?

"With a revolt or insurrection the Government of that country, Generally, has no choice but to intervene and stop these moral and ethical acts from internally destroying their country. Thus a plague may be necassarry in some experiences. In France came the plague involving the revolution. With revolution comes a plague. Many citizens of France died in the streets, prisons, and guillotine. Thus in France this plague was not entirely necassarry. Therefore a plague is both a good and bad experience and in most cases cannot be halted."

I assume we are supposed to believe the bubonic plague was intentionally released by the French government as a biological weapon? This kid is nuts! haha

"Witht he plague in Europe comes a highly positive result. Killing 25 million people was depressing, but required. Can any person even comprehend what Europe would be today with the siblings of those 25 million dead. I don't think that anybody can comprehend that fact. [...] The plague in Europe is just one example of present day positive effect. There will never got an era without plague. It is required for survival."

In no way is the death of 25 million people positive or required. He tries to make a point by saying that the plague caused the advancement of economy, science, technology, and society. I'll give him that, but how is this required? Moreso, how is the death of 25 million people positive??

Sheesh, what a wacko. I so would have given this kid a D grade or lower if I was grading his paper. He's got his facts all wrong, and mixes up ideas and statements from one paragraph to the next. And his use of english is horrible!