The Instigator
taylor_duncan84
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Kenneth_Stokes
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Should Child Labor be legal??

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...
Kenneth_Stokes
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/3/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,011 times Debate No: 32048
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

taylor_duncan84

Con

Child labor is not just harming the physical, mental, and emotional well being of a minor, but any job that prevents them from going to school. The 6 main effects of child labor are
1. Child labour deprives a child of a proper childhood.
2. He suffers physical and mental torture.
3.He becomes mentally and emotially mature too fast which is a dangerous sign.
4. Child labour creates and perpetuates poverty.
5. It condemns the child to a life of unskilled, badly paid work.
6.Ultimatly this leads to child labour with each generation of poor children undercutting wages.
Kenneth_Stokes

Pro

I'm assuming by the word "child" or "minor" you mean ages 4-12. With that established, I shall move on towards the debate.

When creating laws over such topics it is wise to remove all emotion that a combination of words might bring. When the common person hears the phrase child labor, he or she thinks of Little Timmy working in a hot, dangerous, polluted factory from 9 to 5. At, for the purpose of this debate, may I establish that the previously listed scenario is not the norm of child labor nor is it intended to be. Also, let us be practical and say that no rational loving parent will send their child to labor, thus leaving him without an education, unless they truly have to. And in that sense, there are certain scenarios where a child may have to work for the well-being of his family. But let me refute your six cases before I go on any further.

1. Child labour deprives a child of a proper childhood.

Such a response is all based upon perception. What is proper to one culture or society is considered corrupt to another. However, I will be lenient and assume that by proper you mean the typical American lifestyle: born, play, go to school, part-time job, college, etc. But let us refer to one of my previous statements in the second paragraph, that there are certain scenarios where it would be beneficial for the child's family and his own future if he were to work. For example, lets say there is an economic collapse of some sort, and the family needs extra income. Without this job Little Timmy's family won't be able to eat and thrive as they normally should, therefore leaving Timmy without a proper childhood. Therefore by getting the job, he and his family can both live a proper lifestyle.

2. He suffers physical and mental torture.

Which relates to my point of people associating child labor with hard work in factories. Which should never be the case. In my standard, is an employer employs a child, then that child must be able to effectively and efficiently do such task. Who's to say a employer can't hire a child to do a simple task such as tallying the number of people who walk into a store each day for an mere hour? That isn't torture in the slightest. In fact, since Little Timmy is getting paid for such a task, he would probably be happy that he gets to buy what he wants. Also, take farmers into example. Most farmers put their child to work in one way or the other, and as they grow older, they become fond of their work, land, and tradition.

3.He becomes mentally and emotially mature too fast which is a dangerous sign.

A dangerous sign of what? I could mark this statement as void for no being specific enough, but I will assume that you mean dangerous to mental development. Well let's refer to my final sentence in the second refute. Which is more "dangerous" a child growing up thinking he is entitled to whatever he desires or a child who understands the value of work ethics and strives for what he wants. Even if it were true that being mature is a danger (which you give no support to), it has more positives than negatives. Especially in moral character and financial awareness.

4. Child labour creates and perpetuates poverty.

I believe I somewhat refuted this in refute #2.

5. It condemns the child to a life of unskilled, badly paid work.

Not entirely true. That is assuming the child never returns to school or recieves any form of education from the first day of work to the rest of their life. But in Little Timmy's scenario, he only work for an hour, which can be anytime during the day. Plus, the have the ability to work as a child will look good on a resume, as it shows they are somewhat aware of how the work environment operates.

6.Ultimatly this leads to child labour with each generation of poor children undercutting wages.

Not to be lazy, but I feel as if all of my refusals combined refute this final statement.

Your move. :)
Debate Round No. 1
taylor_duncan84

Con

That was very well planned, and thought out argument, my fellow component. However, you used the same scenario, with, little Timmy, was it? Well, anyways, this whole scenario was based on that little Timmy's family needed money, and he was their only option. But, in the real world, a scenario of child labor could also be children sold to strangers in a sweatshop, no food, no pay. Little Timmy's not so good now, is he?
Child labor isn't just children working under their own will, but can also be children treated like slaves, building houses in the sun, no water. Or operating life threatening machines, no instructions on how it works. Beaten o death if their task is uncompleted by the end of the day. You chose to look at a scenario where nothing tat was happening was wrong, and should be legal, but in the same group, and legalized by the same law being passed, is my scenario.
The ball's in your court. Play wisely;)
Kenneth_Stokes

Pro

We're both wrong at right. In my scenario, child labor is legal, therefore certain safety laws apply with it, thus making it safer. In your scenario, child labor is illegal and does not require the voluntary permission of the child, i.e. sweatshops. You are correct in saying that child labor can be more than working at ones will, but you must also be congruent in that stance and say that illegal labor in general is has its own faults. I'm sure prisoners in work camps don't enjoy their free labor and dangerous environment, especially those in sweatshops, yet in many places of the world that is legal as well.

From what you said, it seems that your debate isn't focused around whether or not child labor should be legal, but whether or not illegal labor is moral--it isn't. Because in a legal, safe environment, like that of the United States and other developed countries, there is no reason why child labor should or even could be dangerous. There are plenty of petty jobs for Little Timmy that does not involve hard labor, machinery or hazardous chemicals.

"You chose to look at a scenario where nothing tat was happening was wrong, and should be legal, but in the same group, and legalized by the same law being passed, is my scenario."

Alas, we seem to be looking at the same coin but from a different perspective--I see tails; you see heads. We both agree that legal child labor in safe environment should be legal and we both also agree that child labor that puts the child in harm's way is bad and should be illegal. My scenario was in an safe environment, your scenario was not, yet they are both present in the same world. Unfortunately for you, you are con towards the belief that child labor should be legal, which was contradicted in the bolded sentence above. Therefore debate-wise and by contradiction, I have won this debate. Little Timmy is proud.
Debate Round No. 2
taylor_duncan84

Con

How do you feel that you have won, when right now, only you agree with your previous arguments? I am not at all saying that i have a better chance of winning this debate, because i do not, but that as of right now, you and i are both winning and losing, with a tying score of zero.
But, like i said, and you pointed out again in your previous argument, the good and bad scenario's of child labor would both be occurring all around the world just by this one law being passed. Do you really think it's worth it, helping out some, while torturing others?? It's not a very large toss up, now is it? Little Timmy could be in either situation, your's or mine, but if there are millions of little timmy's and little sally's everywhere in the world being tortured each day, would you really want to be responsible for voting for that to happen? For voting for child labor to be legal?? i think not. Now, congratulations on winning, because evan though you haven't , you probably will, but i give myself congratulations for looking out for all the little Timmy's and little Sally's, which you did not. Not everything is butterflies and rainbows, the world is a bad, scary place, with bad, scary people, that can do bad, scary thing to kids who still believe in Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy. Ponder that, my fellow opponent, because it is your move;)
Kenneth_Stokes

Pro

I feel like I have won because I have refuted your arguments while you have not successfully done so towards mine. Along with the fact that I have proved that you refuted your own argument, thus contradicting yourself.

"But, like i said, and you pointed out again in your previous argument, the good and bad scenarios of child labor would both be occuring all around the world just by this one law being passed. Do you really think it's worth it, helping out some, while torturing others??"

The accusation listed above is false. I said nothing about just this one law being past. By using the word scenario I was referring to the situation between a safe and non-safe environment of the same world, and how your basis is on that of a 3rd world country while mine is of a first world country. If this law IS to be passed, then the health and safety regulations would imply, thus causing an end to all abuse, where if it isn't, the employers will turn to illegal means of obtaining child labor and enforce the worker's cooperation with threats and violence.

Conclusion: by not voting for child labor, nationwide or worldwide, you are subtlety advocating illicit child labor that uses violence and abuse against legal, regulated child labor that provides legal safety for the child with fair working conditions. as in all scenarios, it is better for Little Timmy to be forced into labor in a society where child labor is legal and fair than opposed to where child labor is illegal and the fairness of the child is in the hands of a stronger adult than in legal federal hands where the child has the right to sue. I win; vote Pro.




Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Nyx999 4 years ago
Nyx999
taylor_duncan84Kenneth_StokesTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Kenneth just cut Taylor down at the knees. He refuted every single one of her arguments and he did it with grace. Taylor, next time you create an argument like this (I assume you made this for an easy debate) I suggest that you write, Should Children be banned from doing High Risk Jobs, since that seems to be what you are focusing on.