Childrens toys taken out of fast food meals.
I thank the instigator for offering up what I hope will be a fun debate! Let's get this started shall we?
I will start by addressing my opponents points, before making my own case!
"By putting toys, especially ones that are from movies only promotes children wanting to go eat this fast food which is the leading cause of obesity."
Do you have any significant proof to back up this claim? There are a great many reasons kids choose to go to fast food restaurants; Them being hungry, play places, and yes of course toys. This is all part of the advertising game, to get customers. However, can we really say this is what is leading to Obesity? Is it really McDonald's fault for advertising their business? Or is the obesity "problem" the parents fault for taking their kids to the fast food restaurant in the first place? More on this later.
"Even 20 years ago, people did not use cars as much as they do today."
I am not sure owning a vehicle has much to do with Obesity. Transportation is essential in this day and age. Not everybody works within reasonable walking distance to their home, this is fact. That said, owning a car and keeping up personal exercise, are two things that can co-exist together in the same world.
"There are other outside factors that cause obesity, but I believe that it can be helped by leaving the toys out of the kid's meals at fast food chains."
If fast food restaurants didn't give toys, children and their parents would still go to them. A lost of parents seem to find cooking food on top of doing all the other chores required to be a parent, a bit overwhelming. That said, it is justified to take kids out to eat once and a while. I don't see any data or statistics proving how parents take kids to fast food restaurants repeatedly, every other day. That said, in order for a child to be un-healthy, they would have to go to fast food restaurants frequently to get obese anyway. So if someone is going to a Fast food restaurant with their kids once a month, what's the harm in putting a toy in their happy meal? To take that away from all children would be cruel. Ultimately it's the parents responsibility to make sure their children don't get obese, as if that is a major problem anyway.
"Maybe this will make children not want to go to that place for food."
In order for this statement to hold any credibility, you must believe that fast food restaurants are purely evil all the time, for every person. In which case, I feel it's safe to ask the question: Why?
C1: Is it the "Toy's" Fault, or is it the parents responsibility?
Yes the question above is a good one. Do parents not have the ability to tell their own children "no" when it comes to them asking for fast food? If obesity is a problem for their children, and they don't want their child gaining weight, then it probably wouldn't be a good idea to take the kid to the fast food to begin with right? It's easier often times to blame advertisements, and marketing tools for our own problems, but really advertising is how the world is run. We as merchants have some of the responsibility of whether or now we choose to buy the product. By buying the product, we should know very well what consequences or repercussions it may have. If a parent is taking a child to a fast food restaurant, their intent probably is to feed their child. Of course the child will be excited about receiving a gift in a toy as an added bonus. But ultimately it is the parents decision on whether the child can get that toy, or whether he eats his food before opening or playing with the toy.
To quote an article I found:
"Should big food and fast food joints take responsibility for their part in the health crisis that is upon us (such as a fat tax)? To what degree are they responsible? Groups like the Center for Consumer Freedom counter with the personal responsibility card.
We are the ones who wear the robes and carry the gavel when it comes to what enters our mouths. Nobody is pointing a gun to our heads and demanding we down ½ pound burgers, a small bucket of fries and a pop big enough to dock a jet ski in."
Contention 2: Toys in meals have benefits
If anything, the toy's represent a benefit. As some parents may know, it can sometimes be hard to get children to eat. If a child knows a toy is in their meal, and that by eating their meal, they can play with it, these fast food restaurants are only helping.
Toys for children also can be expensive! Parents spend lots of money on toys for their kids every day. Fast food restaurants adding them in complimentary, is a cool way to save money as well as feed their own children!
Law makers themselves were able to see the innate harms of banning toys from happy meals.
"We are proud of our Happy Meals and will vigorously defend our brand, our reputation and our food," spokeswoman Danya Proud said. "We stand on our 30-year track record of providing a fun experience for kids and families at McDonald's."
Last year, McDonald's bent to consumer advocacy pressure and said it would add a serving of fruit or vegetables to all its Happy Meals while shrinking the serving of fries."
Fast food restaurants like McDonald's don't have to cause to obesity, as the article above proves. Thus making the banning of toys seem ridiculous.
To conclude, I feel I have proven my point. Fast food restaurants aren't to blame for obesity, it's the parents fault, and responsibility if they so choose to prevent obesity. Also to say obesity is a problem in and of it's self is a brash judgement.
What exactly is wrong with it?
I feel I have also proven that toys have more benefits than actual harms in which they possess.
I feel it is safe to conclude that over all, happy meals, and fast food restaurants are perfectly justified in giving toys out in their meals.
Thankyou, and I look forward to my opponents response.
I do think it mainly lies on the responsibility of the parents or guardians to ensure that their child is eating the healthy foods but I do also believe that possibly banning these toys in the meals would prevent the children from getting hooked on these types of foods. I do agree it is all about the advertising but I also think it encourages people to want to eat that unhealthy food.
There are many circumstances where parents work late and there is simply no time to make a home cooked meal, so in those cases I can understand taking your child to a fast food restaurant to eat something quick. To conclude my argument, I would say these toys encourage getting hooked on fast food "junk" food. Thank you.
"I do think it mainly lies on the responsibility of the parents or guardians to ensure that their child is eating the healthy foods but I do also believe that possibly banning these toys in the meals would prevent the children from getting hooked on these types of foods. I do agree it is all about the advertising but I also think it encourages people to want to eat that unhealthy food."
My question to you, however, is whose responsibility is it to prevent their children from eating fast food when health is an obvious issue for their children? Can we really blame the corporations? It is after all their JOB to fund and raise money through selling their foods. Advertising to children is a way for them to make money. Again, let's not take our children to fast food restaurants if we don't want them eating unhealthily. That is OUR responsibility as parents and adults.
Well, not much to say else really. All of my contentions were either untouched on, or agreed with. I do thank my opponent however for instigating this debate, and offering up thoughtful discussion.
I hope the audience enjoys this debate, and wish my opponent luck in the next round.
Obesity is looked upon as a problem that is continuously getting worse and worse. One problem leads to another when a person is obese. There are many health problems that come along with obesity such as diabetes, as well as breathing and heart problems. The list could go on and on. So what I am simply trying to say is that by removing these toys and maybe substituting it with a healthier snack, such as a fruit, would be a better deal in the end.
Again, this may not even stop these children from wanting to go to these fast food chains, but at least it allows them to have some what of a healthy snack, instead of a toy that does no justice for your health.
"The responsibility lies on the parents or the adults in the situation. The corporations are not to blame but at the same time by adding these appealing toys to the meals, it encourages the children to want to eat at these unhealthy places in order to receive these toys with their meals."
I agree that toys in fast food attract children. I however also know that htere is a purpose for them being there, and don't feel taking them out is neccesary. The companies advertising with toys in their meals are only doing their job: Making money. They are more likely to attract kids by advertising these toys, thus making them more money. However, is obesity really these companies fault? My question is why the parents do not take responsibility for taking their children to these restaurants if they do not want them getting fat?
"Obesity is looked upon as a problem that is continuously getting worse and worse. One problem leads to another when a person is obese. There are many health problems that come along with obesity such as diabetes, as well as breathing and heart problems. The list could go on and on. So what I am simply trying to say is that by removing these toys and maybe substituting it with a healthier snack, such as a fruit, would be a better deal in the end."
I have said this before, and I will say it again. Takiing toys out of kids meals will not make people stop eating at fast food restaurants. If a child is getting hart burm, and diabetes from eating too much McDonalds, their parents probably shouldn't take them their. Most kids that I know barely even eat their food, as mainly all they care for is the toys and the play place. But that's beside the point. The point is you having the burden of proof, must prove to me how children will suddenly stop eating fast food once the toys are removed from the equation.
"Again, this may not even stop these children from wanting to go to these fast food chains, but at least it allows them to have some what of a healthy snack, instead of a toy that does no justice for your health."
No matter what, the child will still get obese if their parents continually take them to fast food restaurants.
My point remains Un-Refuted, that the blame remains on the parents if their child is obese.
Both of my points have been un touched by my opponent, so please extend them across the board. Thankyou.
samantha0331 forfeited this round.
samantha0331 forfeited this round.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|