The Instigator
fdsaBIG
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
birdlandmemories
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Children should be forcefed shugar till they have diabiedus then take all sweets away

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 4 votes the winner is...
birdlandmemories
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/31/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 599 times Debate No: 59805
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

fdsaBIG

Pro

Kids need to learn to be tough and diabeedus is really easy to get over so lets get that out of the way.... Um Duh.... to debate on this you must be sexist but not racist, think teenagers should haveto have 100,000$ in order to be adults and agree old people are useless
birdlandmemories

Con

Children should not be forcefed sugar til they get diabetes, and then take away the sweets, because currently, there is no way to get rid of diabetes completely. Plus, when you get diabetes, you have a higher chance at suffering from a heart attack or stroke, which can cut down your life span.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
fdsaBIG

Pro

fdsaBIG forfeited this round.
birdlandmemories

Con

My opponent forfeits.
Debate Round No. 2
fdsaBIG

Pro

um no there is a way. It is called prayer to the lourd jesus chiste. and also dr. phill will give you a majic potion to put in your bath that you must soack the back of your feet and top of your forhead in for 8 hours takeing a short break and then for another 3 hours while staying on a stricked wet cracker diet. so there.
birdlandmemories

Con

No there is not. Sure it may help with the pain from diabetes, but there is no complete way to get rid of diabetes.
Debate Round No. 3
fdsaBIG

Pro

yes there is and even if there wasnt a little diabeedus never hurt nobody
birdlandmemories

Con

Wrong, diabetes can cause a heart attack or stroke, or in some cases both. That is a major reason not to forcefeed children sugar.
Debate Round No. 4
fdsaBIG

Pro

you seem to be way too close to this topic to debate it efficiently. Sorry for the inconvienience of my knowlege however if you just go look up dr. phill's magic bathtub potion you shall see i am correct and you is not correct... allso i would like to mention that there are no deathes proven to cause diabeedus so that compleetly is better than your point wich wa you dont have one mom give me back my mustach i love it more than my pet hamster... please dont sit on my hamster
birdlandmemories

Con

Closing statements:

I have proven why children should not be forcefed sugar til they get diabetes, and why the should not have the sweeets taken away.

Please vote con.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by T_parkour 2 years ago
T_parkour
fdsaBIGbirdlandmemoriesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro forfeited round 2 and accused Con of being "way too close to this topic to debate it efficiently." Spelling and grammar: Pro had all kinds of errors in spelling, capitalization, punctuation, etc. Arguments: Con actually made legitimate arguments backed up with documented facts, while Pro made strange and unsupported arguments. Sources: n/a Side note: It seems, based on his/her other debates, that Pro is either a troll account or extremely stupid. I will give Pro the benefit of the doubt and assume that he/she is a troll account.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
fdsaBIGbirdlandmemoriesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: omfg laughing
Vote Placed by YaHey 2 years ago
YaHey
fdsaBIGbirdlandmemoriesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Uh, I always swore I wouldnt vote on troll debates but today I break that promise. I think it is fairly obvious, but for formality's sake. Conduct: forfeited round 2. S&G: "jesus chiste" was used by Pro on the third round, I believe. Pro didn't try to back up their side, nor do I believe they intended to. So kudos to Pro on a nice troll debate.
Vote Placed by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
fdsaBIGbirdlandmemoriesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made no attempt to back up his point.