Tattoos Before 18
Debate Rounds (1)
Long gone are the days of tattoos having a valid meaning to people. Today they are nothing more than an accessory , such as earrings and lipstick. When asked if it should be okay for a person to get a tattoo before they are 18, I am strongly against. To me, if you are under 18 , chances are you still live at home. If you were to get a tattoo of something offensive or repulsive, that not only reflects on you, but on those who you live with. Though tattoos can be harmful to a reputation, they can also pose other risks. Tattoos have been known to infect the bloodstream, and can cause health issues. Some people can have allergic reactions to the ink, especially red and green. The site of a tattoo is also a wonderful opportunity for skin infections. But these are all small issues right? After all, 'swag ain't free'.
This is my stance on the tattoo issue. I hope you can present a valid argument which counterbalances the 1253 characters which it took to write this marvelous piece of awesome.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mr.Grace 1 year 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:||3||1|
Reasons for voting decision: I felt that neither debater made the most of essay form. Con began with too many sentence fragments and ending weakly. Pro only offered a brief paragraph with little elaboration.
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.