The Instigator
lr4n6champion
Pro (for)
Losing
22 Points
The Contender
Mogget
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

Pokemon must be outlawed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,481 times Debate No: 4734
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (13)

 

lr4n6champion

Pro

IF we look at the show pokemon, a couple clear factors can be seen:
1. weird, japanese-created monsters battling each other
2. People capturing creatures against their will into freakishly small balls
3. Groups like "Team Rocket" being abused and constantly launched thousands of feet into the air, somehow surviving
4. Cheap animation costs
5. Horrible punchlines
6. A trading card game and video game market that causes kids to rob, murder, and assault just to get a Pikachu

Now I am sure there is plenty more wrong with Pokemon, but just looking at this list we can see that pokemon need to be outlawed. We can't promote our kids to try to enslave harmless creatures that happened to be from Japan and then let them keep them in freakishly small balls and battle with them. We also can't let cheap animation and horrible punchlines to infiltrate our kids minds. We don't want them growing up to make another Animated version of The Hobbit. Plus we can't promote freefalling from thousands of feet without a parachute, surviving explosions, and not being effected by electricity. That is exactly what Pokemon does and it must be outlawed for the good of the country

I now stand for cross-examination
Mogget

Con

Mogget forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
lr4n6champion

Pro

Well I guess I will wait for the next round since nothing has been said yet from the opposition. I should take this time to say good night and good luck
Mogget

Con

On the CONTRARY!

Pokemon should be promoted.

a. Weird freakish monsters battling each other is actually a very good thing. It is a useful reminder to all of us that strange freakish monsters we meet in the future just might not be friendly. It reminds that little child that has never seen a mountain lion, and might at first sight desire to pet it, that perhaps the mountain lion is not nice. Perhaps the mountain lion is much like a Charizard. And while this may result in the child possibly hurling a poke ball in order to catch the mountain lion; it remains a fact that not ALL children who see a mountain lion (or other dangerous animal) for the first time have a poke ball.

b. People capturing creatures against their will into freakishly small balls.

Is once again a good thing. It teaches the moral of being a good child. See, a child is the embodiment of a pokemon. It has walls enforced upon it by it's parents. These walls are undesirable to most all children and thus they fight the walls. This is where Pokemon steps in, Pokemon shows us that when the pokemon finally learns to accept it's walls it loves it's poke master. In other words, when a child finally learns to accept what it's parent's regulations on it's life, then it will be happy.

Example:

c. Groups like team rocket being abused.

Really? Must I explain?

Team rocket is an metaphorically one of two things:

1. Following my metaphor from before team rocket represents the shady people down the street who keep trying to kidnap your children. They will stop at nothing to attempt to steal a child. The launching them into the air clearly shows just how much nothing will impede their desires; they will always come back. Thus Pokemon teaches us that creepy freakish child kidnapping stalkers should be dealt with immediately and correctly.

2. Team rocket also occasionally exemplifies the United States floundering space program. They are a constant reminder at just how little progress we have made towards manned voyages to space in the last 10 years. Like team rocket we keep falling short of our atmospheric boundaries.

d. Cheap animation costs.

I fail to see how this could ever be a bad thing. Cheap animation should be promoted at all fronts. Who wants to go out and make a movie to discover that the cost of animation will be in the millions of dollars? It is essential for small business to compete that we allow for cheap animation. The cheap animation in Pokemon acts as an incentive for small computer businesses to make their own animation that is slightly better than Pokemon.

e. Horrible punchlines.

Once again inspire better punchlines from people in the future. My opponent has taken the completely wrong direction with his line of thought. Instead of saying, "What can I do to belittle Pokemon's horrible jokes." He should be saying, "I should go make a series with better jokes than Pokemon and cooler animation to make myself a ton of money! Woot!"

f. A trading card game and videogame market that causes kids to rob murder and assault just to get a Pikachu.

Ah, clearly a misleading thought from my opponent. In Africa kids rob, murder and assault in order to get food. Does this make food bad or evil!? Nay! It is in fact the lack of a parents guidance that is the real problem, a problem that pokemon has been trying to fix for ages. Pokemon preaches, "Listen to your parents!" Without such a vital message from Pokemon even more kids would be out there robbing, murdering, and assaulting. In fact, kids not playing pokemon would have to find something else to do, drugs, alcohol?!

The real question is, why is my opponent so thrilled with misleading our younger population?

Having exposed my opponent for what he really is, I must ask for a vote in negation of this topic.
Debate Round No. 2
lr4n6champion

Pro

Here are my opponent's points and their refutations

a. Pokemon should be promoted

First my opponent states that we are protecting our children from monsters they may be encountering in the future and thus we should promote pokemon. He is clearly misled. My opponent gives the example of a mountain lion being visible and a child not going near it because it thinks it may be a charizard. Unfortunately this is not the case. What my opponent overlooks is the fact that the majority these pokemon creature are meant to seem harmless and lovavble on the outside. (The original Japanese connontation was pocket monsters which were supposed to be small creatures). Now looking at a mountain lion, it seems like a harmless growlith on the outside. It is only too late when the child realizes that the lion is not harmless and as already take by suprise with its flamethrower. Again and again we see the main characters of pokemon rushing towards a pokemon to catch it or pet it, only to be met with various painful attacks. (Torkchicks, pikachus, and the like)

Now it is true that most kids don't have pokeballs readily available, but those that do will not hesitate to use them and those that don't wouldn't mind using a rock instead. What is the harm, the creatures pulverize each other already right? This will lead to attacks on the children.

b. A child is the embodiment of a pokemon

Err... no it is really not. usually most children don't say their name over and over again like all other pokemon. But besides that, how can we compare our children to something like these pokemon. We may place regulations on them, but we don't enslave them and call out attacks for the to fight each other. We can't compare things like this. Plus if we look at the prime example of the series, Ash and Pikachu, as you provided in a youtube link. Now Pikachu refused to go in a Poke Ball and electricuted Ash until Ash finally succumbed to Pikachu's desires and allowe it to stay outside a Poke Ball. If we took your interpretaion, then it is clearly shown that your child/pokemon is able to use electric methods to break the walls the parents place around them. That is in no way ok, so in both aspects your argument cannot be taken to heart.

c. Team Rocket is a stalker/space program and must be abused
1. My opponent is right when he says that stalkers should be handled correctly, but he misinterpreted the true point of that statement I made earlier on. Team Rocket is abused and that is all great, but the fact that they are able to be launched thousands of feet into the air and still survive is what is misleading to kids. Do we want our kids jumping off cliffs and the like thinking that they will survive like team rocket and on another side, do we want kids to think that even after a bad guy is launched thousands of feet in the air, they will still survive, thus leading kids to question all theories of gravity and life as we know it?
2. Now the space program idea seems to answer nothing about Team Rocket not dying from cataclysmic falls, but though it is true that the space program has taken serious blows and survived, it is also true that during those blows, maunly shuttle crashes, people havbe died, and to deny that would not only be a dishonor to their memories, but deceptino of kids everywhere.

d. Cheap animation costs are great
Cheap animation costs are not good for a simple reason. They show are kids that cutting corners are ok and that they don't have to work hard to make money. This is the wrong message. We want to imbue high standards in kids so that they succeed in school and in life. A show where the backgrounds and the characters rarely move is not the best example. The business front my opponent mentions is on a front seperate from the main audience of pokemon: grade school children, not business owners, and therefore has no weight on the role of pokemon when we look at the people who watch.play it.

e.Horrible punchlines inspire people
Again, looking at our audience, grade school kids, there really is no inspiration, resources, or mental capactity to start a TV show or the like. Horrible punchlines lead to children telling worse and worse jokes at school and with friends, leading to a staler sense of comedy, decline in the use of the funny bone, and an overall decline in the image of America's youth

f.Pokemon promotes listening to parents
When we look at pokemon, it honestly shows no hints of promoting obedience. Really its quite the contrary. The show leads kids to addicition, with a to be continued, after practically every single episode. This leads kids to want to consistently watch Pokemon and play the game even when their parents are telling them to stop. Plus, pokemon trading cards also give a lust for these children to constantly acquire more and more trading cards. A prime example of this can be seen my local Wal-Mart. A young boy ventured into the trading card section and found a pack of pokemon cards. He began begging his mom for pokemon cards and she kept saying, "No, we just got some last week", but this kid was adamant and made a fit, leading his mom to embarrasment and shwing clearly that pokemon promotes disobedience, not obedience. Finally on the Africa point, food ios a necessity to survive and Pikachu really isn't, so that point is negated.

Now my opponent thinks I am misleading young people, but I must truly ask, why promote something that clearly does so much wrong to our children, that glues them to either the television, or a paper card, give them notions of fighting each other, and making them think they can cut corners on life and survive great falls.

Now that I have refuted my opponents arguments on my starting statements, I must stongly urge an affirmative ballot.
Mogget

Con

Mogget forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by thevoice101 1 year ago
thevoice101
you wont be able to outlaw Pokemon because its not your choice and this debate wont do any thing
Posted by deathknight1559 8 years ago
deathknight1559
i think that pro made some good points and pokemon might not influence violence but its so stupid like seriously its like watching the teletubies for god sake your just making yournchildren complete retartes i now a kid that watches barney and he stuffed food inside his video recorder to try and feed barney these shows are really inmature like how stupid would i look if i went outside and said can i battle you with my pikachou people would laff at me
Posted by lr4n6champion 8 years ago
lr4n6champion
yep caught me red handed ...
Posted by Im_always_right 8 years ago
Im_always_right
@lr4n6champion

LUKE SKYWALKER!!!

it makes perfect sense.....
Posted by lr4n6champion 8 years ago
lr4n6champion
hi all peoples... yeah ill re-challenge u sometime mogget... this was just my first debat

oh... and who do u think i am?
Posted by brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
I know who the other is... ;)
Posted by gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
Woah, I just got confused...>.<
Posted by Mogget 8 years ago
Mogget
I guess it depends on who you think he is. What was the idea you had?
Posted by Mogget 8 years ago
Mogget
Ah sigh.... I've been such a bad debater lately. lr4n6champion please re-challenge. I can give you a better run for your money than that.
Posted by gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
Is lr4n6champion who I think he is? =O
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by bookwormbill111 8 years ago
bookwormbill111
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 
Vote Placed by lr4n6champion 8 years ago
lr4n6champion
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by deathknight1559 8 years ago
deathknight1559
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Pokemon31 8 years ago
Pokemon31
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by RedLighter 8 years ago
RedLighter
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by nalie123 8 years ago
nalie123
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by jurist24 8 years ago
jurist24
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by slayer54321 8 years ago
slayer54321
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Mogget 8 years ago
Mogget
lr4n6championMoggetTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03