The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should teenagers be allowed to have smart phones?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
JSMG has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/15/2017 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 660 times Debate No: 98995
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Hello, ladies and gentlemen, I, as the opposition team, am strongly oppose the motion being debated, 'Should teenagers be allowed to have smart phones?' and have 3 arguments that opposes the motion. The first one is Addiction, the second one is Inappropriate content, and the third one is Distraction. Before I get into my arguments, I would like to define the motion. I would like to define teenagers as children from the age of 12 to 17, and smart phones as a mobile phone with an advanced mobile operating system that combines features of a personal computer operating system with other features useful for mobile or handheld use. Now I am done defining the motion, I would like to get started with my arguments.
Our first argument was Addiction. If we let teenagers have smart phones, they could get addicted to the smart phones, and not concentrate on their study. As you know, middle school and high school is the time you have to study the most, but if you get addicted, you would not be able to concentrate on your study,but only your smart phone. according to, students do 6% better if schools ban smart phones. But, smart phones do not only affect scores. Smart phone addiction comes with the anxiety to be on the smart phone again, and like cigarettes, it is also hard to stop using smart phones when you start using them once.
Now that I am done explaining the first argument, I will move on to my second argument, Inappropriate content. There's lots of ways to access inappropriate content like violence or pornography with a smart phone. Also, teenagers are the time of puberty, and it is about time they get interested in these things. So if they have smart phones, they could access these inappropriate content, so teenagers should not be able to have smart phones.


Hi, I will be accepting this argument.

So, I will not start picking apart your arguments (I'll save that for the second round), but instead focus on mine. So anyway, smart phones. There are cons to using smart phones, and I can't deny that, but the pros are far more superior

1. Accessibility (human contact)

Basically, smart phones main purpose is connecting with people no matter where you go. And in this day and age, teenagers depend on smart phones. Not only do their parents get easier access to them wherever they are, but they also use them to arrange where they will meet with their friends. I am just out of teenage years, and I can tell you from experience that they made my life a lot easier. Also, let's say you don't know how to solve a math problem. You go onto Messenger and ask one of your friends. This isn't possible without smart phones

2. Accessibility (content)

Smart phones help teenagers get whatever content they need in an instant. Say you are talking with your friends about the Man. United V's Liverpool match that is happening right now and want to find out the result. 35 seconds later, you know the result, the goal scorers and basic statistics. The problem is, most people associate teenagers with pornography. "Oh, all they do is watch naked ladies all day". Why do you care? Teenagers are curious by nature, and no matter what you do they will find pornography.

3. Entertainment

Every day teenagers all around the world connect to the Internet. Most of them connect with their smart phones because it is easier that way. Internet is now the everyday part of our lives. You can't tell your teenage boy in this day and age "Go outside and play with your friends" because most of the time, his friends are having fun on the Internet. Taking away your teenagers smart phone doesn't make them more sociable, but alas, you steal the only fun thing in their lives, and in turn, less sociable.
Debate Round No. 1


Hello, and thank you for accepting my debate. By mistake, I changed the opposition and proposition, and I'm sorry about that. Anyway, I will now rebut all of your arguments and present my third.

1. Accessibility (human contact)
You said that parents get easier access to them wherever they are and also can arrange where they will meet their friends, but that is also possible with 2g phones, and as I will say in my third argument, it can cause distraction. Also, if you don't know a math problem, asking a friend on messenger is not a good way. First, they usually don't even try to solve the problem, and even if they do, they couldn't explain in through messenger.

2. Accessibility (content)
You said most people associate teenagers with pornography, but this isn't true. Even if it is, pornography isn't good for teenagers. It can cause reinforce harmful gender stereotypes, contribute to young people forming unhealthy and sexist views of women and sex and contribute to condoning violence against women.

3. Entertainment
You said teenagers playing with the internet is good for their social life, and I can't deny all of it, but what would happen if they get addicted. As you know, addiction doesn't only happen from games, but also the internet. If they get addicted, they wouldn't even care about what they have to do and what they have to study, and just sit in the sofa with their smart phones all day. I get that smart phones improve students' social life, but I would think that meeting with your friends would be much better with smart phones. Also, I'm not only talking about on boy or girl that doesn't have a smartphone, but that all the teenagers don't have them. If nobody their age has a smart phone, then they could meet maybe not 365 days a year, but at least more than when they had smart phones.

Now, my third argument.

3. Distraction
Having smart phones can cause distraction for teenagers who are trying to study. If they were on their smart phones for a hour or two, then they put it down to study, they would get a notification from their games, facebook, or kakaotalk etc.
then they would pick their phones up again to see what notification has come, and most of the time, reply to it. Then, even if they want to study or do something else than their smart phones, they would not be able to. Also, you said we can arrange where we can meet with our friends, but this isn' t going to be done in a minute or two, it usually takes one or two day to get one arrangement finished. But you can't be on the phone all day while your friends arrange where and when to meet, so you put down your phone and ignore the first like 100 notifications, but then, you get so curious, you open your phone. then your friends have seem to arrange the meeting when you can't go. then they start all over again, which takes a hour or more again.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by JSMG 1 year ago
Sorry I've been inactice, I had some personal issues
Posted by YummyBurgers 1 year ago
I know :D
Posted by Youngastronomer 1 year ago
Hahahaha, you've put it wrongly. Your argument shows you being against smartphones but you picked "For" hahahahaha.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.