The Instigator
blumbev
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DerKurbis
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Football 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 1 vote the winner is...
DerKurbis
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/11/2016 Category: Sports
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 293 times Debate No: 86381
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

blumbev

Pro

Football is a brutal sport that can have lifelong consequences! When your brain is bashed against your skull, it never fully recovers. In fact, scientists are learning that repeated concussions may lead to Alzheimer"s disease, Parkinson"s disease, and memory loss. We don"t let teens ruin their lungs with cigarette smoke"so why would we allow them to damage their brains in the name of football?
DerKurbis

Con

If the teen and the parent consent to it, they should be allowed to play. There are also positions that do not involve contact. Special Teams players do not get tackled without a "Roughing the Kicker" penalty. You also say that laws preventing children from smoking work, but then explain why, according to the CDC, each day, 3,800 teenagers smoke their first cigarette and 2,100 become daily smokers. This proves that prohibiting football will have no effect just like banning smoking did.
Debate Round No. 1
blumbev

Pro

blumbev forfeited this round.
DerKurbis

Con

DerKurbis forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
blumbev

Pro

blumbev forfeited this round.
DerKurbis

Con

DerKurbis forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SocialDemocrat 12 months ago
SocialDemocrat
blumbevDerKurbisTied
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 Checkmark1 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: Con rebutted pros pretty weak opening statements and he never responded, so it was total annihilation.