The Instigator
MolecularBird06
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Blade-of-Truth
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Alcohol Should Be Banned

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Blade-of-Truth
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 652 times Debate No: 46664
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

MolecularBird06

Pro

First round is acceptance.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

I accept, and will argue the position that Alcohol should not be banned.
Debate Round No. 1
MolecularBird06

Pro

Alcohol should be banned for numerous reasons. The first of these is that Alcohol cause 88,000 deaths per year through excessive drinking and many more through drunk driving. With 30% of Americans abusing Alcohol, this number is only going to go up. Also Alcohol is one of the leading substances that teens abuse.It isn't hard for teens to get there hand on Alcohol considering the fact almost every household in America contains at least one Alcohol beverage. Alcohol is also considered one of the most deadly drugs known to man, in fact some people rate it as the most deadly. Even though drugs like crack are more harmful to your body, Alcohol is considered to do more damage to society. All in all, I think Alcohol should be banned.

Sources:
http://www.cdc.gov...
http://www.cdc.gov...
http://drbenkim.com...
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...
Blade-of-Truth

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for posting his initial argument as it is very thought provoking. Unfortunately, my opponent fails to understand the full ramifications of banning Alcohol and seems to view the subject in a very narrow frame of mind. One must remember that, in broadening the scope used to view alcohol, it is not merely a drink that is sometimes abused, but rather a very important and useful substance which when used correctly, can in fact save lives.

I. Alcohol as a pain reliever

At some point in our lives, it can be said that a majority of us have seen one or several war films. Whether a documentary, a Hollywood blockbuster, or a memoir-turned-film. More often than not, if the movie captures an older war such as the Revolutionary War, or perhaps even the Civil War - there is always that one scene that no-one can ever forget: The medical tent. No matter what movie it is, we are always subjected to that wonderful bloody mess they called a medical bay. You'll see the guy who is being told that his leg needs to get removed, followed by his fellow soldier handing him a bottle of whiskey or rum to chug quickly before the doctor takes the saw to the leg. But why? Why is it that they always seem to show the wounded soldier chugging some Alcohol before going under the knife?

Whiskey was commonly used during the Civil war as a painkiller.
Whiskey is a form of Alcohol.
Therefore, alcohol was indeed playing the role of painkiller in times of war.

Furthermore, whiskey was also a commonly applied anaesthetic for toothaches. A tradition also used by mothers who have babies that are teething or can't fall asleep - a dash of whiskey in the milk or on the gum line.

Source: http://www.katebridges.com...
&
http://en.wikipedia.org...

One cannot deny the important role alcohol played on the battlefield in times of war and emergency. One also can't deny the countless lives of soldiers that were spared from certain sufferings by being given alcohol in such times. This brings me to my next point:

II. Alcohol fights off Infection

Have you ever heard of Rubbing Alcohol? It is also known as a Surgical Spirit and is one of the most commonly used and easy to apply anti-infection agents known to mankind. It would not surprise me in the least if a majority of individuals in the audience didn't have rubbing alcohol applied to a few cuts or scratches during their lives. I sure have, and even have a bottle of rubbing alcohol in my bathroom drawer now. The inception or history of its use as an anti-infection agent should be evidence enough of the healing properties that can be attained from the proper use of alcohol.

One must never forget that such applications are necessary for the success rates of operations in countries that still do not have access to first-world machinery or technology like many modern first-world countries. Banning alcohol would not only jeopardize the lives of countless individuals who are currently or would be fighting infections without access to proper medical treatment but it would also hinder the ability of those doctors to improve the quality of life for such individuals who would otherwise be treatable had alcohol been around to fight off the initial infection.

For some basic information on Rubbing Alcohol please visit this link: http://en.wikipedia.org...

III. Education

Ultimately, what I have listed above are nothing but mere shadows of the overall beneficial applications that can be gained from having Alcohol in our world. My opponent has failed to see that: By taking one negative aspect from one basic use of such a liquid substance is elementary at best and truly not a legitimate reason to completely ban such a beneficial substance. This is not to say that abuse of the substance known as alcohol is not an issue worthy of study, but in the grander scope of things, banning such a substance would do nothing more than hinder those who use its properties for good from continuing to do that good work. We must think about the hand-sanitizers, the cleaning products, the medical applications, the anti-infection properties, the pain relief properties, amongst countless other uses that, in fact, benefit our society as a whole and benefit countless other cultures and nations that use it for beneficial purposes.

Lastly, I will say that if alcoholism is what truly motivated my opponent to start this topic - that such an issue really falls into the individualistic realm of responsibility. We cannot allow the mistakes of those whom have succumbed to the addiction of alcoholism to motivate such an extreme measure as an all-out ban on alcohol. Have we learned nothing from the past? Must we truly be victim to repeating the mistakes made in the past? There are many solutions available to alcoholics, and while the misuse of such a substance is unfortunate in all regards, it is not a viable reason to enact a full ban of such a substance - especially when the substance has such beneficial uses to all manners of medical practice. What we need to be doing, if my opponent truly believes such a singular issue requires such a harsh reaction, is to educate our young to understand the importance of moderation in all things - not just alcohol. Perhaps then, and only then, would we be able to correct the underlying issues that are currently eating away at our society. What I know, without a doubt, is that banning alcohol is not the solution needed for such issues.
Debate Round No. 2
MolecularBird06

Pro

Oops, sorry I meant as in alcoholic beverages. My fault, so all your points are valid.

Alcohol is a pain reliever, this is true, but there are also there are knew pain killers such as Tylenol,for small things and Dilaudid for major injuries. Also it is bad for minors to drink whisky, it can lead to devolopment problems or death.

Source: http://www.chacha.com...

"Alcohol fights off Infection "

This is true, but minors have used this to make something called Purple Drink, which is basically over the counter drugs, which includes rubbing alcohol and mix it with jolly ranchers and sprite then drink it. This has caused many deaths and is a growing problem because it is extremely easy to obtain the ingredients and make it.

Sources: http://www.narconon.org...

Also rubbing alcohol isn't the only way to fight infections, you can use thing like anti biotics which a person can also use to fight of infections. Also it is extremely hard for a human can ge infected in the first place. Even though rubbing alcohol is a common way to fight infections, there are also many other ways that as common to fight infections.

"Ultimately, what I have listed above are nothing but mere shadows of the overall beneficial applications that can be gained from having Alcohol in our world. My opponent has failed to see that: By taking one negative aspect from one basic use of such a liquid substance is elementary at best and truly not a legitimate reason to completely ban such a beneficial substance. This is not to say that abuse of the substance known as alcohol is not an issue worthy of study, but in the grander scope of things, banning such a substance would do nothing more than hinder those who use its properties for good from continuing to do that good work. We must think about the hand-sanitizers, the cleaning products, the medical applications, the anti-infection properties, the pain relief properties, amongst countless other uses that, in fact, benefit our society as a whole and benefit countless other cultures and nations that use it for beneficial purposes. "

Alcohol, is useful, but washing your hands is as effective as using hand sanitizers. Also alcohol kills 80,000 people a year plus more from people killed in drunk driving accidents in the U.S alone. Minors can easily be killed by alcohol and it can cause development issues.

"Lastly, I will say that if alcoholism is what truly motivated my opponent to start this topic - that such an issue really falls into the individualistic realm of responsibility. We cannot allow the mistakes of those whom have succumbed to the addiction of alcoholism to motivate such an extreme measure as an all-out ban on alcohol. Have we learned nothing from the past? Must we truly be victim to repeating the mistakes made in the past? There are many solutions available to alcoholics, and while the misuse of such a substance is unfortunate in all regards, it is not a viable reason to enact a full ban of such a substance - especially when the substance has such beneficial uses to all manners of medical practice. What we need to be doing, if my opponent truly believes such a singular issue requires such a harsh reaction, is to educate our young to understand the importance of moderation in all things - not just alcohol. Perhaps then, and only then, would we be able to correct the underlying issues that are currently eating away at our society. What I know, without a doubt, is that banning alcohol is not the solution needed for such issues."

The problem is that alcoholics don't admit that they are addicted on a normal basis, making it hard to help them. Minors who are curious about the substance get addicted, and can easily die, even though minors are being taught not to drink curiosity wins many over. These people get others addicted. A full out ban on alcohol can help lower the number of addicts and deaths in the United States.

Also I extend my points from the last round, because my opponent has not refuted them.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

I. Alcohol as a pain reliever

My opponent has agreed with me that alcohol can serve as a pain reliever.

With that said, I fully acknowledge that their are other pain relievers nowadays and was merely pointing out the historical value that alcohol has served. We must not forget my point that most countries are not as developed as first world nations such as America. If we implemented a ban on alcohol altogether we would still be robbing most developing countries from a vital and easy to access pain reliever. To think that Tylenol or Dilaudid is easily accessible everywhere in the world is incredibly shallow and reflects once again the narrow scope in which my opponent is perceiving this issue. Unfortunately, the reality is that alcohol still serves as an ever present, easy access pain reliever for those who are not or do not have the capability or access to a convenience store or doctors office. To think that those drugs are a viable solution for everyone is ludicrous.

II. Alcohol fights off infection

Once again, my opponent has agreed with me that alcohol serves an important role as an anti-infection agent.

I would also like to point out that my opponent has totally misunderstood what 'Purple drink' is, and makes me wonder if he even bothered to read the information on the link he shared. According to my opponent:

..."minors have used this to make something called Purple Drink, which is basically over the counter drugs, which includes rubbing alcohol and mix it with jolly ranchers and sprite then drink it."

To correct my opponents mis-informed contention, alcohol plays no role whatsoever in the creation of the drink known as 'purple drink', according to the link my opponent shared:

"Purple Drank is a mixture of a prescription cold medication with a soda drink like Sprite or Mountain Dew, plus ice and Jolly Rancher candies often added for color and taste. The cold medication should contain promethazine (an antihistamine) and codeine. These ingredients combined make a purple liquid that is then sipped until euphoria and dissociation from one's body occur. These effects will last between three and six hours."

Source:http://www.narconon.org...

As you can see, my opponent has no idea what he is talking about when making the claim that 'purple drink' involves alcohol. I hope my audience takes into consideration his blatant mis-information and will look towards his own link to verify the inaccuracy of his claim.

My opponent also tries to downplay the importance of having access to rubbing alcohol. And makes the bold claim that it is extremely hard for a human to get an infection in the first place. Once again, my opponent attempts to turn a blind eye against the majority of humans in this world that don't share the same quality of life as Americans. In many regions around the world, a doctors office or pharmacy is not within a 15 minute drive, the reality is that many do not have the option to drive a few minutes to the local pharmacy and grab anti-biotics. Furthermore, most anti-biotics that fight off infections require a doctors prescription which involves a costly appointment and time. The ease of rubbing alcohol must not be overlooked when considering the global implications of banning all alcohol based products, especially anti-infection products such as rubbing alcohol.

III. Hand Sanitizers and other claims made by opponent.

It has been proven that alcohol based hand sanitizers are much more effective at killing diseases such as E.Coli than my opponent's hand washing method. The University of Maryland did an experiment recently with the show 'Good Morning America' to test whether alcohol based hand sanitizers were really that much better than hand washing or other non-alcohol based hand sanitizers. "The first thing we noticed is that alcohol-based hand sanitizer clearly works the best."

Source:http://abcnews.go.com...

"Also, alcohol kills 80,000 people a year plus more from people killed in drunk driving accidents in the U.S. alone. Minors can easily be killed by alcohol and it can cause development issues."

Yes, and cancer killed 580,000 people last year. So by your logic we should ban cell-phones, Genetically Modified Foods, microwaves, cigarettes, make-up and any other cancer causing products or things right?

Source: http://www.cancer.org...

Heart disease killed 597,000 people last year. So we should ban any and all products that could cause heart-disease right? Let's ban hamburgers, milkshakes, and fried chicken - because hey, they kill people!

Source: http://www.cdc.gov...

Your point is an emotional one, but if we banned literally every little thing that caused someone to die, our world as we know it would be unrecognizable. Let's ban guns, and television, and prescription drugs because people have died from all those things! It makes no logical sense. We cannot let emotion get in the way of rational thinking.

IV. Alcoholics

My opponent wishes that we enact a ban on alcohol because it would reduce the number of deaths and addicts in the United States. Yes, and we should ban television because people get addicted to that, and definitely ban working out because those health freaks get addicted and within gyms people have had heart attacks. We should ban prescription drugs because people get addicted to those and die, and we should definitely ban hamburgers because people get addicted to fast food and die from unhealthy lifestyles. Your reason for banning alcohol is completely irrational.

The point I am trying to make is that we cannot just go and ban every single thing that causes addiction, that is but one negative result of one practice of using alcohol. It would be like saying lets kill the octopus because one tentacle is damaged even though it still has seven other perfectly fine tentacles working. We cannot risk losing one of the most accessible and easy to obtain, medically beneficial substance known to man.

If we truly wish to solve the problem of addiction, we need to look at the mental dispositions of certain individuals and consider environmental factors. Not every person is the same and to enact something that would punish the many, just to help a few, is not a logical decision in any way, shape or form. My opponents initial claim that alcohol is easily accessible to teens also falls into this category of self-responsibility and moderation. Many countries have a lower drinking age than America and also lower cases of alcohol abuse.

Source: http://www.udetc.org...

Perhaps there is a connection between this phenomenon that calls for further study. Perhaps, if we raised our future generations on the values of moderation and incorporated the right traditions to teaching children when and how to properly use alcohol, we might not need to even have this conversation. We must approach the issue of addiction with more viable actions that can be done to fix the underlying issue of addictive personalities or traits within the individual - because banning alcohol is not the solution that will fix an issue that spreads far beyond just alcoholism. Addiction comes in all forms.
Debate Round No. 3
MolecularBird06

Pro

MolecularBird06 forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

My opponent has forfeited round 4.

Unfortunately, it seems that my opponent has failed to rebut my last argument and also failed to provide a closing argument. I would like the audience to take into consideration that my final argument and rebuttals stand unchallenged by the opponent. I would also stress the importance of presenting valid information and the betrayal of that standard by my opponent in presenting mis-information to the audience in his last argument. Furthermore, the fact that he didn't even refute that or apologize is extremely telling of my opponent's character.

In closing, I believe I have presented a valid case with reasonable points as to why alcohol should not be banned. I can only hope that my audience takes into consideration the points I have presented, along with my opponent's unfortunate forfeit in round 4 and his mis-information agenda.

It was a pleasure debating this topic with my opponent nonetheless, and I look forward to any and all challenges in the future. I thank you for the opportunity and wish my opponent a good day.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by blaze8 2 years ago
blaze8
Someone clearly hasn't learned of the glorious nectar of the Gods that is Beer. And Scotch. And Vodka. And aged Rum.
Posted by Taylur 2 years ago
Taylur
Look at the alcohol prohibition years in the USA; it didn't work out.
Posted by CrazyCowMan 2 years ago
CrazyCowMan
DAMN I wish i could debate this! (as pro)
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
MolecularBird06Blade-of-TruthTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 2 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
MolecularBird06Blade-of-TruthTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Its a clean sweep for Con and now the reasons why. Con presented logical rational arguments, while Pro appealed to emotion. Additionally, Pro misinterpreted a source and as such gets source points docked. Conduct points have to go to Con as Pro forfeited the final round of the debate. S&G goes to Con as Pro made multiple errors grammatically as well as spelling. Good debate until the forfeit, but again a clear winner here.