The Instigator
dandan1251
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
jm_notguilty
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Resoved All old people with out animal alergies should have pets

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
jm_notguilty
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/13/2011 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 813 times Debate No: 19846
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

dandan1251

Pro

Resoved All old people with out animal alergies should have pets.
jm_notguilty

Con



Thanks for instigating.


Since my opponent didn’t elaborate his post, I exercise my contender right to provide accurate definitions of debate to understand.


Also, since this is a 2 round debate, I probably need to post my full contentions here since I cannot present new arguments in my R2 post.


Definitions:


Old people- Senior citizens, usually people aged 60+. Also, I quote Wikipedia, defining further: Old people have limited regenerative abilities and are more prone to disease, syndromes, and sickness than other adults.”


Animal allergies- hypersensitivity to certain substances produced by animals, an allergic reaction to animals.


Should have- must have, ought to have.


Pets- household/domestic animal kept for companionship/pleasure.


Case:


It’s safe to assume that my BOP here is to argue that old people without allergies having pets is a bad idea, as it may be a disadvantage.


C1: Forcing seniors to do this is a violation of their constitutional rights


Now, I know that this may be a stretch but the resolution stated that these seniors (without allergies) be forced or should have pets. What if said seniors don’t like to have pets? That will obviously cause a dispute, since coercing them to what they do not consent to and a huge risk to them is illegal, not to mention ageist.


C2: Cost/Expense


Obviously, if an old person without allergies decides to buy a pet, it would cost him big. Pets are expensive, especially the exotic ones or purebreds. Also, not to mention you have to buy their food and toys for their recreational time. In addition, you would also have to buy a bed, a leash or maybe a license (to own ‘some’ pets) and a vet. Please note that an animal cannot be held accountable for any of their doings, they are dependent of the owner everytime. I don’t think a retired middle-class senior with enough problems in his mind would like this.


C3: Hard Work



    • Leisure


Pets have feelings too, they get bored so they expect their owner to do something for them. Maybe go to the park and play fetch (that is if the old person can still throw a ball). Like the premise states, it is hard work, and old people haven’t got enough energy on them.



    • Training


Similar to leisure, training a pet is important. But do old people have enough energy? No. Even if it’s for protection, it would require patience and time to eventually get a pet to go along with you.



    • Lots of cleaning


Aside from costs to buy some cleaning equipment, the poor old owner would need to clean up their pet’s poop or waste from the floor. Most old people don’t have the energy to crouch and clean. Pets also introduces insects, flees and parasites to the house because of the dirty things. These insects can be a risk to the owner.



    • Need Patience


Pets are time-consuming and require a lot of patience. They may be an annoyance, inconvenience and nuisance with all their loud antics and nonsense. This would depress the seniors. Not to mention the pets (esp. dogs/cats) may destroy, eat, scratch the owner’s favourite stuffs (furniture, clothes).


C4: Risks



    • Pets (esp. dogs) are prone to hurt/bite people


If pets aren’t well-trained, they will surely harm the people around, which would lead to hospital expense, lawsuit settlements and a bad reputation to the owner.



    • Old people normally have disabilities


Even though these old people have no allergic reaction to pets, they are still prone to the risks since, well, they’re old. They may have illnesses, psychological or mental conditions or depressions. A pet would just make it worse for them.



    • Death of pet: Sad.


If a pet dies, that would be devastating to the owner. And assuming that the owner has a heart condition, then we would need to provide two tombstones.


Conclusion:


As I said, a pet is always dependent on the owner, they expect the owner to provide them with everything they need.

I've proven that old people (with or without allergies) having pets would be a bad idea.

I now await PRO’s rebuttals.




Debate Round No. 1
dandan1251

Pro

dandan1251 forfeited this round.
jm_notguilty

Con

lol

Opponent closes his account and forfeits.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 2
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by WriterSelbe 5 years ago
WriterSelbe
dandan1251jm_notguiltyTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
dandan1251jm_notguiltyTied
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 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: Full forfeit.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
dandan1251jm_notguiltyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: wtf pro