Debate Rounds (3)
The debate will precede as follows, the first round will be acceptation and brief statement of views on topic. (1-3 sentences) The second round is where both sides will put up their main argument (at least 2 paragraphs) You may not rebut what your opponent said in rounds 1 and 2 during the second round. Round 3 will be the rebuttals and closing arguments. Swearing is not allowed. Sources must be cited. Best of luck to my opponent.
I will be arguing against lawns because they serve no piratical purpose, and are a straight up odd concept.
Thank you to Pro for accepting this challenge. In this round, I will point out the reasons lawns are a bad concept and shouldn't be used everywhere.
Waste of Supplies
Taking care of a lawn uses a massive amount of resources that can be used for better purposes. Yale University estimated that the U.S uses 600,000,000 gallons of gasoline to mow and trim lawns. That's 5 gallons per household. The human energy used to push mowers could be used for better activities.
In some Western states, (New Mexico, California, etc.) the amount of fuel used to move the water to irrigate the lawns is the same as the amount that is used to mow the lawn itself. The water that is used to irrigate lawns could instead be used to irrigate crops or be given to those who need it.
Also, massive amounts of natural gas is wasted by being turned into fertilizer for lawns. The amount of gas used to make 200 bags of fertilizer is enough to heat a home for a full year. The transport of this fertilizer to the stores, and then to your home costs additional fossil fuels.
Space Could be For Better Purposes
The space used for lawns could be used for something better, like a garden. There are other things that could be used, but the garden is one of the better choices. Having a garden gives you access to fresh and healthy vegetables and decreases your carbon footprint by making it so you don't have to go to the store for all your food. It saves you money by not having to buy all your food from a supermarket. You save money, time, gas, and energy on mowing because a garden doesn't need to be mowed.
Other, more arid, parts of the world could just not have lawns or a garden. They could have whatever plants and soil type is native to their area. This would save massive amounts of oil, natural gas, and water.
I thank Pro once more for this debate.
I would like to thank Con for providing a unique debate to debate.org. For this round I will point out the reasons that having a lawn is a good thing.
Adds Value to Home
If someone keeps their lawn well maintained it can add up to 18% on a home value. The reasoning for this is that having a more attractive home makes it more valuable. Giving a home a well maintained lawn can complement a home and give it a fresh clean look. Lawns also can clean the air around the home by absorbing CO2 and releasing Oxygen into the air around the home giving it fresh air feel. Freshly cut grass has been voted number one as UK's favorite smell and this is possible by a well maintained lawn.
Lawns help with Exercise.
Obesity is a problem throughout the world. Mexico has the highest obesity rate at 30% of residents considered obese, coming in at second is the United States at 28%, and United Kingdom comes in at 25%. The causes of such high obese rates is that it people aren't eating the proper foods and getting enough exercise, but having a lawn can fulfill one of those requirements. Mowing can be great exercise with an engine powered lawn can burn up to 178 calories, while having a non-engined lawn can burn up to 251 calories in a 30 minute time span. A lawn also is a great place to have safe fun. It is much safer to have children play out front compared to having them go to a park alone. It is a great place of children to get out an play and have some daily exercise.
A lawn is great, I have one and I must say it is just great to see a well maintained lawn and the fresh smell of cut grass gives me goose bumps. Thank con and I will be looking forward to your response.
This has proved to be an interesting debate. Remember to vote Con! In this round, I will rebut my opponents arguments.
Is It Worth the Value?
Although lawns do add to the value of a home, is it worth the massive amounts of time, effort, water, and fuel used to maintain it? It is estimated that the average American will spend 150 hours mowing. And like I said above, the U.S uses 600,000,00 gallons of fuel on their lawns. Not to mention the environmental cost of the fertizilers that run off into rivers, lakes, and other bodies of water, killing the fish and other wildlife. Is that worth an 18% increase in your home's value?
Exercise Could be Safer
More than 74,000 Americans are injured by lawnmowers are injured each year, just a little less than the amount of people injured by firearms. 30% of these incidents result in amputations, and more than 5,000 of those 74,000 injures are on children. This is a quote from U.S.A TODAY newspaper,
"Lawn mowers hit or run over hundreds of children every year, and one of them was Mason Lindley. When his mother, Tracey, hit a bump as she backed up her riding mower, she was horrified to see 3-year-old Mason underneath the machine.
Her children "had been taught not to come around the mower," says Lindley of Burlington, N.C. "He must have had something really important to tell me."But Mason didn't remember what it was when he woke up from surgery.
He was missing his spleen, part of a lung, part of his pancreas and stomach, and all but 6 inches of his intestine. Mason died last year of complications from minor surgery after surviving three years with his injuries."
As in this case, many people use riding mowers over push mowers, defeating the whole argument that mowing is good exercise.
I hope I've convinced you to the side of Con.
It is Worth the Value
My opponent in the second round claims that the United States uses 600 million gallons of fuel on their lawns which averages out to be 5 gallons per household. The current average price of gas in the United States is $3.62 times that over 5 times that makes $18.10 for a years worth of gas for the lawn. The overall price of maintaining a lawn which includes watering, mowing, and weeding adds up to an average price of $241.00 a year. The average cost of a home in the United States since February 2013 is $152,000. 18% of $152,000 is $27,360, which simple math shows that $27,360 > $241. The price on the environment is matched by the benefits that a lawn brings with CO2 cleaning and giving purifying water. The cost of maintaining a lawn is worth the price.
There is no such thing as safe exercise, injuries will always be apart of exercising. 400,000 people died in the United States because of exercising, the only safe exercise is not exercising; but the does not get anyone healthy. Mowing the lawn is just exercise that makes people healthy and adds value to a home. For those who use riding mowers still get sun light that helps with lower blood pressure, reduces risk of type 2 diabetes ,and reduces risk of stroke.
Having a lawn is a great thing and I would like to thank my opponent for a great debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 3 years ago
|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||3|
Reasons for voting decision: This was a well constructed debate. I give argumwnts to pro as he showed the cost of maintaining a lawn is offset by the value a lawn adds to the home by a factor of a hundred (plus a little). He also correctly pointed out that all forms of physical activity involve some risk, and therefore this fact alone is not enough to justify entirely abstaining from the act.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.