The Instigator
Hasib
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Lukas8
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

This house will ban chocolate for under ten children

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 3 votes the winner is...
Lukas8
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 353 times Debate No: 87013
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

Hasib

Pro

This house will ban chocolate for under ten children
Lukas8

Con

G'day and good luck to my opponent.
I'll be taking the CON side in this debate, please excuse me all, I wont write long arguments, I haven't been on Debate.org for a really long time, Helaas.

I hope that Pro will give me more information why that house will ban chocolate for under ten children. There was a very good comment by @MagicAintReal : "But if there are more than ten children you're cool with it?"
Debate Round No. 1
Hasib

Pro

Hasib forfeited this round.
Lukas8

Con

PRO has forfeited,
because he's forfeited I lack exact information.
I believe more and more that this is a joke/troll debate.

Nevertheless I will give my argument.

Part/Teil 1:

I've got no information about which house will ban chocolate. But I assume that it has to be a kindergarten or something like that, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Giving chocolate to children is harmful in large amounts. 100g of Milk chocolate contains 2,240 kJ of Energy. Chocolate can have a negative impact on children by: highly increasing the risk of obesity & smaller increases of cardiovascular risks. But this really depends on which Chocolate we're eating.

(Chocolate 1=white chocolate, 2= milk chocolate, 3= (pure) plain chocolate)
(A = sugar
B = cocoa butter
C = milk powder
D = other ingredients
E = cocoa liquor)

The high amount of sugar, could also increase the risk of diabetes.
But this does not mean that children should be forbidden from eating chocolate. It only means that they shouldn't consume it every day, but instead on holidays or festivals etc.

Part/Teil 2:
lt makes no sense to ban chocolate in an institution or building only because there are less than 10 children. Chocolate won't have a less damaging* effect on children only because there are more of them. It depends on the amount of Chocolate (also which type of chocolate) consumed by an individual child.

* damaging is meant as increasing the risk of a disease.

Sources:
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org...
[2]http://www.cacaochocolade.nl...=

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
Hasib

Pro

Hasib forfeited this round.
Lukas8

Con

Thanks for the little debate.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
This house should be Veruca Salt.
Posted by jglass841 1 year ago
jglass841
I think he means children under ten years old. He just has terrible grammar.
Posted by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
But if there are more than ten children you're cool with it?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by fire_wings 1 year ago
fire_wings
HasibLukas8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture, arguments presented only by Con.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
HasibLukas8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Not sure what Pro is attempting to say. Voting Con due to only Con posted an argument. And Pro forfeited two turns.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
HasibLukas8Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture