There should not be any CHILD BEAUTY PAGENTS!!!
Debate Rounds (3)
It should be the childs decicion...
Also, people are forcing the children to have CRAZY stuff to make them look the part!
I'm at war with myself on whether I should take this debate seriously, or troll it using the fact that you are con (against) there being no beauty pageants. Meaning you actually said there should be child beauty pageants. Okay, I guess I'll take it seriously. But next time be sure to take the side of your resolution, unless you're against the resolution.
Begin your arguments.
It's crazy what they do to the kids!
Since you have made no real arguments, I have nothing else to say. The next round is your last chance to make a significant post. I highly recommend that you post several strong and detailed arguments, and not just one little thought.
Children should not be forced to join beauty pageants by their parents.
I think that it should be the child's decision...
The parents of the children are forcing them to get implants and full body waxes and stuff to make them look the part! I think that the children should have the chance to decide whether or not they want to have to go through all of the preparations. I don't think that the parents know how much it hurts for their small children to have body waxes or implants; I mean, it already really hurts for a fully-grown adult, so it must hurt even more for the kids! Also, if the kids are exposed to this at too young an age, when they grow up they will think that it will be good for their child to do this too, so they will end up hurting their own children too!!
Also, I think that ‘Beauty Pageants' are already very boring, and it is even worse with kids! In my opinion, there is nothing more boring than having to watch kids walk up and down an aisle! It is even more boring than having to watch kid do ballet dances; at least then they aren't just walking! I think that the children in it must be bored with it too!
More than half of the time, the parents are pushing the kids to win, because they didn't when they tried. Also, everybody thinks that beauty pageants improve the child's maturity, when that isn't true. I think that they just make the child more likely to be encouragers for this type of thing, which will end up spreading and ruining more and more kid's lives.
From my essay, I hope that you think that child beauty pageants are horrible, and that you now know why!
I think that it should be the child's decision..."
Are you now saying that beauty pageants should be legal? Your resolution stated that there should be NO beauty pageants, so this is technically irrelevant.
Anyway, children cannot be forced to join a beauty pageant. Although parents may have some influence, a child would not be directly forced against her will to participate in a beauty pageant. And once again, you have no sources to back this up.
What makes you think that body waxes and implants hurt more for kids than adults? No sources, just guessing.
Although permanent things on children such as implants and tattoos should probably be illegal, this has nothing to do with why child beauty pageants should be illegal. Instead of completely getting rid of it, it may be more reasonable to simply make child implants against the rules, or even against the law. I agree with this point, but it's irrelevant as to why there should be no child beauty pageants.
Why would the grown-up child think that it's good for their children? If it was really that bad, it would have the opposite effect. The child would think of it as a bad and painful experience, and would keep their children as far away as possible from beauty pageants.
What does boredom have to do with anything? Just because you think they're boring doesn't mean others find them boring, or that the kids find them boring. This argument is meaningless.
Your final argument makes various unsourced claims that I seriously doubt are true.
I think the winner is clear. Con (who is actually supposed to be Pro) only made a few arguments in the final round, all of which are irrelevant and without sources. Many of Con's arguments are assumptions, and don't prove anything.
I ask for the conduct point for obvious reasons.
I ask for the spelling/grammar point for my slightly better spelling and grammar.
I ask for the convincing arguments point because none of Con's few arguments were convincing, and I easily rebutted them.
I ask for the reliable sources point because Con included absolutely no sources. For me, sourcing wasn't necessary to rebut the arguments.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 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:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: I think it is obvious
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.