The Instigator
utahjoker
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
Squirrel
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The Soda policy in New York

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...
utahjoker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/14/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 854 times Debate No: 27213
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

utahjoker

Con

First round is an acceptance, followed by two rounds of debate.
Squirrel

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
utahjoker

Con

The current soda policy is that a sale of many sweetened drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces,will not be allowed unless in a super-market. This is in hopes of trying to end obeisidy in the New York area. People who want to enjoy a soda can't do so if they want one over 16 oz this is wrong for two reasons one taking freedom from the people and businesses and also having too much govermental control in or lives. Is obesity a proplem yes can soda make that problem worse yes, but is that for the governmet to decide. The person who is over weight that drinks soda isn't going to stop just because of a new law. There is more health changes in ones life than soda if they wnat to be not over-weight.
Give people freedom and take government out of our lives.
Squirrel

Pro

Squirrel forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
utahjoker

Con

Since my opponent didn't give an argument.
I will just finish by saying this would be wrong for people's and business' freedom and liberty to sell and buy what they want.
If someone wants to put this much sugar in there body (http://www.sugarstacks.com...) they should be allowed no matter the damage to health.
The government can't be our mother telling us what not to eat, but keep each person to have freedom.
Squirrel

Pro

the govermt should be able to make choices about what people dirnk and eat if that food is going to harm their health. it's clear the government knows more about health and science than most peole and their job is to kkep us healthy
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Khaos_Mage 4 years ago
Khaos_Mage
What, specifically, would we be debating?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
utahjokerSquirrelTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited the only round where he was allowed to make new arguments. He then proceeded to make new arguments in the last round, but these arguments were little more than assertions of his position, so he can't be awarded any points.
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 4 years ago
Ron-Paul
utahjokerSquirrelTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con obviously provides better S&G, conduct to con for pro's forfeit, sources because con was the only one to provide them, and arguments are rather obvious; pro made a simple restatement of the resolution and then failed to provide any sources.