Debate Rounds (4)
My opponent believes that the government of the United States should ban the smoking of cigarettes.
I will give my opponent the chance to go first. If she does not wish to, she can start up in round two.
Well I believe smoking should be banned because it would help the environment in many ways. There would be cleaner air and more attractive people. Smoking makes you age like crazy. Plus smoking is very unhealthy. It messes with all your internal organs. I just dont see any good from smoking. Surely you could find something better to do or even spend your money on.
I would like to thank my opponent for her response.
I will agree with her that smoking is unhealthy; in fact I wish that no one smoked. However we have to face the reality that people do, and most likely always will. My argument is not based off of what is healthy or not, it is based off of individual liberties.
A1: If we are going to ban smoking because it is unhealthy, why not ban soda, candy, popcorn, cakes, ice-cream, and all junk food. The number of people who die of heart disease far exceeds the amount of people who die of cancer. Diabetes is on the rise due to our daily diet. So why should the government not ban this? Because of basic human choice. We should have the choice to consume soda, smoke tobacco, or drink alcohol. The government should not have the right to take away our choices. If we let them ban one thing to take care of us, then what stops them from banning those other things? When you willing buy a milkshake, no one is forcing you to consume it. It was your choice to get it. No one is forced to smoke cigarettes.
A2: My second argument is tax revenue. The government makes a decent amount of money selling tobacco products. State governments need all the money they can get right now, and taking away such a big product would take away plenty of money.
A3: Banning cigarettes would open up a new market for drug dealers. Do you think that once it’s banned it will just fade out and be forgotten? Dealers from all over, including Mexico, would see the potential in this new law. People would be willing to pay extreme amounts of money for their tobacco. Do we really want yet another drug on the market? Do we want to spend tax payer dollars putting people who smoke and sell tobacco in jail?
Also, for some reason youth flock to illegal products. It’s “cool” to smoke weed because it’s bad. I would not want this starting up with something as simple as a cigarette. Of course kids are already attracted to cigarettes because they are under eighteen, however a ban would make it all the more “cooler” because not even their parents are supposed to have them.
Regarding my opponent’s arguments, I agree that you could find something better to spend your money on. However, just because you could give my family some food does not mean you should be banned from buying some new shoes.
The environment issue also came up, but I will simply respond that if we are going to take that approach, we might as well ban the automobile.
I look forward to the next argument.
I thank my opponent for this debate.
Do you like KFC?
taylorr forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||5||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Con gets the victory as Pro failed to respond to his case.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.