The Instigator
wyatttt7
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
scienceNerd48
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

School Lunches.

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 2 votes the winner is...
scienceNerd48
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/14/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,409 times Debate No: 52447
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

wyatttt7

Con

I'm am 100% against school lunches! I think they are very unhealthy very bad for you and nasty. I think the government should be worrying about more important things than what kids are eating! Has anyone noticed that kids are far more unhealthy than they were in the 1900s! Let's end school lunches!
scienceNerd48

Pro

School lunches provide parent of lower income to provide their child with a one dollar meal. At my school we have open cook lunches, I do agree that satellite lunches are unhealthy, but open cook lunches can often be very appetizing. You saying that lunches are unhealthy is 100% false because there is a law that makes sure all lunches have a proper nutritional value. The only reason children are more unhealthy is because of what they eat outside of school or their lack of exercise.
Debate Round No. 1
wyatttt7

Con

Science nerd- I do not agree it is cheaper to go to Walmart get some stuff for sand watches and have your kid take them to school. All the foods have GMOs and fake sweeteners! I do agree that what they eat at home is also a problem but kids do not get enough exercise! GMOs are one of the main reasons I think the government should not be concerned about school lunches and worry about the Ecomony! You said you went to school, not very many lunches are good are they? So I am 100% agent it.
scienceNerd48

Pro

It costs about three dollars for bread, four for lunch meat, and four-fifty for cheese, three fifty for a drink, and a fifty cent apple each day. That's nineteen dollars for about eight days worth of lunches, at school that would be half the cost for the same amount of home-made lunches. Once again school lunches provide lower income families with a chance to buy lunches for their child for only one dollar. The only reason I don't eat every school lunch is because I'm allergic to many things they serve such as beans (they have three times a month) and Uncrustables Peanut Butter and Jelly (once a month). Its common sense that paying eight dollars is more cost-saving than paying nineteen dollars.
Debate Round No. 2
wyatttt7

Con

I do agree with you on that. However they are less healthy and non organic! The old school lunches were okay but when Michael Obma took over it became nasty! Do any of your friends say that?! I think they should be less concerned about what kids are eating and focus on what's important! Like it was a HUGE waste of time saying that cookie monster is enspiring kids to eat unheathy so they made him Veggie Monster! I think they should stop serving crap and serve somthing that is organic and taste good!
scienceNerd48

Pro

In conclusion, school lunches, by law, have to be healthy and cheap. The cookie monster was never changed to the veggie monster, which has nothing to do with our argument. The food I eat at school is nutritional and delicious. Your arguments had many holes, making them insufficient.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Jevinigh 3 years ago
Jevinigh
wyatttt7scienceNerd48Tied
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: Con kept conceding points and making simple conservative "one liners" about the government. Pro was the only one who provided any relevant data.
Vote Placed by DarthKirones 3 years ago
DarthKirones
wyatttt7scienceNerd48Tied
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 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: A very short debate. No real sources were used other then common knowledge. I think pro won because of better debate form and better rebuttals.