This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
DOTD - Debate of The Day #52
Return to board index
Post by
FatalHeaven
I thought it would be interesting if Off-Topic had a thread specifically for debates, since I see debates popping up in so many other threads. And instead of debating one thing, we can have a different one each day.
The only thing I ask is that we always keep the forum guidelines in mind when posting a response to a debate. It's easy to get out of hand but lets try to keep mod action unneeded.
Enjoy.
Past Topics:
Should junk food advertising be banned during children's television programs?
Do sports encourage too much violence?
Should convicted felons retain the right to vote?
Should assisted suicide be legalized as a measure of freedom of choice?
Should students have to undergo drug testing?
Is it worth the cost to host the Olympic games?
Should the Fairness Doctrine in the United States be reinstated? (US Topic)
Should parents be allowed to read teens' text messages?
Who make better companions - cats or dogs? Why?
Arizona Immigration Law (US Topic)
Simplify the English language?
Rainbow Oreo: Worth Boycotting Kraft Foods?
Introduce Goal Line Technology In Football?
hould Trident Be Replaced? No not the gum, people!
Do prisoners have too many comforts, such as cable and internet, while incarcerated?
Should vaccinations be required?
Is online education as effective as traditional on-campus schooling?
Cloneing. For or Against. Why?
Is the death penalty justified if the crime did not result in a loss of life?
Do you think that hybrid vehicles are beneficial to the enviroment?
Can teens under the age of 18 have any serious relationship?
Are work unions beneficial to the economy?
Should libraries be allowed to have a list of banned books?
Should there be better civics education in the public school system?
Is the 2012 myth even possible?
Michael Jacksons Death: conspiracy or horrible accident? (US Topic)
An AIDS Vaccine finally within reach?
Are genetically modified foods safe for individuals to consume?
Should schools be allowed to use/practice corporal punishment?
Should courses regarding the Worlds religions be allowed in public schools?
Should the Statute of Limitations be done away with?
Did President Barack Obama deserve to win the Nobel Prize? (US Topic)
Should the legal driving age be raised?
Should it be legal to torture a suspect for information?
Would stricter gun laws lower crime?
Should teens have to abide by a city or state curfew?
Is Modern Medicine Better than Traditional Medicine?
Should couples live together prior to marriage?
Should pharmacists have to fill legal prescriptions for drugs they believe are morally wrong?
Are books becoming antiquated?
Should nuclear power be banned globally?
Should higher education be offered to all for free?
Should power-walking be an Olympic sport?
Is Chick-fil-A turnout a preview of November? (US Topic)
Is space exploration worth the money?
Is killing one man in order to save 10 wrong?
Does the death penalty work as intended?
Is the Zero Tolerance Policy actually needed in the educational system?
Will Paul Ryans Medicare Reform help or hurt the next generation of Seniors?
When are drone killings illegal?
Do you think a person's susceptibility to obesity is truly genetic?
Should Abortion be legal in the cases of rape and/or incest?
Post by
FatalHeaven
Day One: Should junk food advertising be banned during children's television programs?
Personally, I don't see how banning it would help. As a younger child, the parents ultimately control what they eat, how often and in what portions. Once they are a teen, it's less in the parents control and more so depends on what the teen wants to do. It also comes down to how they were brought up. For instance if the parents continually encourage the child to eat healthy, I don't think a Taco Bell commercial is going to undo that. Whereas if the parents are the ones getting take out every other night, the child is going to think its fine and normal and won't see a problem with it. So no, I wouldn't ban it.
Post by
hatman555
Well in your first sentence you say "how it would help". So I guess my question to you is, are you saying that because you do think there is a problem with younger kids eating junk food?
If you do think there is a problem, then banning those commercials would probably help a little. Kids ask for what they see, if they don't see something they won't as for it. I agree with you on every other point though. Parents are the real control. For some families doesn't mater if a kid asks for something, they won't get it if the parent doesn't want them to have it. Yet others can be easier to indulge their kids in getting what they ask for.
I think that product packaging and the foods themselves are more dangerous than the commercials. I barley remember junk food commercials when i was little, but what I do remember is sitting next to my friends in the 3rd grade and watching them eat a fruit roll up, or gushers, and being incredibly jealous! I wanted them too! I would then ask my mom, and promptly get shut down.
Cheers,
Hat
Post by
MrSCH
I'm really not sure. Let's face it, there are viable arguments to both sides and I'm genuinely uncertain as to which side of the fence I fall on. Perhaps I'm not the biggest fan of censorship - I think people need to know what's out there and make the decisions for themselves/their parents can.
I remember never knowing about the effects of alcohol or touching a drink until I was 18, and I became a borderline alcoholic, resiting my entire first year at University because my routine was as follows;
- Wake up, hungover.
- Eat junk food.
- Go out and get very drunk at any hour of the day.
- Head to step one.
I didn't pay any of my accommodation - my first year was very rich, very easy to buy a large amount of drink each night. Second year I paid for it, paying for two lots of accommodation.
I think that had I been 'exposed' gradually to alcohol, this may not have happened. Instead it was a massive rush of 'OMG what is this? It's brilliant!'
TANGENTIAL!
Post by
hatman555
Sorry, maybe a miss understanding in what I'm asking.
You posted the question. And you answered it to get the debate going right?
In your answer you say:
Personally, I don't see how banning it would help.
So what I was asking of you in my first block of text was. What do you see as "the problem"? Obesity? Other health problems associated with junk food? Diabetes? A growing culture of over indulgence? Poor eating habits developing?
After that, I just ramble a bit on my relation with junk food growing up.
Cheers,
Hat
Edit: Did you delete this? Was it a miss understanding? ^_^The question was not made or worded by me in any way, Hat. It was Copy/Paste from a site with many debate questions. :)(##RESPBREAK##)136##DELIM##hatman555##DELIM##
Post by
Rystrave
Perhaps I'm not the biggest fan of censorship - I think people need to know what's out there and make the decisions for themselves/their parents can.
I agree with this. If people aren't able to judge and make good decisions on their own/have their parents make good decisions, then something is seriously wrong. A child's biggest influences are their parents. Their parents control what they eat, what they watch, and what they can get into.
Post by
MyTie
It is intiutive, but unnecessary. Parents are there to make sure kids consume good food. If we really want to legislate responsibility, due to some bad parents, why not just give our kids to government and let them raise them? We could have youth camps, with busts of the president. They couldn't call him "dad", but I dunno... something respectful... like "dear leader". I don't think it is government's place to raise kids. That's parents.
My kid is always sneaking treats, though. We have fruit out on the counter... apples, oranges, bananas, grapes, strawberries, etc. He thinks he is being sneaky when he creeps into the kitchen and gets an apple. We don't keep candy and junk around, generally. We also try not to set a bad example for him. Occasionally, like once a week or two weeks, he might get a scoop of ice cream.
Post by
MrSCH
A chocolate bar a day isn't going to kill your wee fella :D
Well, unless you're raising him to be the next Ronnie Coleman ;)
Post by
gamerunknown
I think advertising should be banned in general. Ethical capitalism is predicated on an informed populace: rational choice theory. Advertising utilises intellectual property and copyright law to utilise as many techniques as possible and exploit as many cognitive biases to ensure that the populace remains ignorant. Protesters with nowhere near the funds of McDonalds are trammelled for besmirching McDonalds name by associating McDonalds with diseases or practices which they cannot demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt in court, while McDonalds can associate its brand with sports stars and fun in children's minds. Coca Cola can show people drinking Coca Cola, singing and rainbows emanating from their vicinity, but Pepsi can't show someone drinking Coca Cola and then going on a murderous rampage.
If advertising didn't work, it wouldn't form 9% of the GDP of the US, a greater proportion than the amount spent on education.
See
here
and
here
for more.
Post by
Squishalot
I think advertising should be banned in general.
Big call - would you agree then that all media content should be paid for? Or existing paid media content to double/triple in price, to compensate producers in lieu of advertising dollars?
Considering that advertising helps pay for things such as school buses, road maintenance, pedestrian bridges, bus shelters and other similar public services, I'm fairly comfortable with the presence of advertising of most sorts (with the alternative being funding from the government and associated increase in taxes), and I think regulators generally have done a fairly decent job at managing the content of said ads in the past.
Post by
MyTie
I think advertising should be banned in general.
If you ever come out to golf in Oregon, let me know if you need a caddy. I'd be delighted to sell you my services.
(Should the above be an arrest-able offense?)
Post by
FatalHeaven
Sorry, maybe a miss understanding in what I'm asking.
You posted the question. And you answered it to get the debate going right?
In your answer you say:
Personally, I don't see how banning it would help.
So what I was asking of you in my first block of text was. What do you see as "the problem"? Obesity? Other health problems associated with junk food? Diabetes? A growing culture of over indulgence? Poor eating habits developing?
After that, I just ramble a bit on my relation with junk food growing up.
Cheers,
Hat
Edit: Did you delete this? Was it a miss understanding? ^_^The question was not made or worded by me in any way, Hat. It was Copy/Paste from a site with many debate questions. :)
I deleted it after I re-read the question and realized I mistook what you were asking. I would have given a correct response sooner but I only woke up 10 minutes before work >.>
Yes I do think children go way overboard with junk food. Adults too. Do I think the advertisements on tv make it worse? Well, I mean they can't help the circumstances but I don't think they make it any worse than it already is.
Post by
hatman555
I deleted it after I re-read the question and realized I mistook what you were asking. I would have given a correct response sooner but I only woke up 10 minutes before work >.>
Thought that's what it was.
Yes I do think children go way overboard with junk food. Adults too. Do I think the advertisements on tv make it worse? Well, I mean they can't help the circumstances but I don't think they make it any worse than it already is.
So yeah. I totally agree with you. I think children go way overboard with junk food as well. Advertisements might be a place to start to fix the problem, but I think it will be a generational domino effect. Even if the commercials stop today, doesn't mean a kid in school still won't know that
dunkaroos
are the coolest snack ever, and that won't stop his other friend that doesn't have them to beg and beg their parents to have them too. He wants to be cool too!
Cheers,
Hat
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
FatalHeaven
#2: Do sports encourage too much violence?
My response:
Sports do not encourage violence. They encourage competition and social interaction. They do not directly encourage the individuals to be violent. They do encourage the participants to out-play and do better than their opponents.
Post by
Squishalot
Are we counting e-sports like Call of Duty and Battlefield here as well?
Post by
Adamsm
The sport no....the Fans? Oh very much so.
Post by
FatalHeaven
Fair enough Squish, for the purposes of this debate topic, we would be talking about real life sports. For instance Rugby, Football, Hockey, Baseball, Track, Soccer, Lacrosse, Basketball...etc
Post by
Squishalot
How about boxing, MMA, normal martial arts, etc.?
WWF?(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
FatalHeaven
The sport no....the Fans? Oh very much so.
Totally agree here.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.