The Instigator
Lebanon
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ZakYoungTheLibertarian
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

parents should be responsible for their children's safety

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,653 times Debate No: 29945
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Lebanon

Pro

Parents tend to leave their children alone and therefore making the child an easy prey for kidnappers. Furthermore, sharp things are also left unkept causing the children, for example, knives, children age between 1 to 4 years will be curious and start to play with the thing, causing them to get hurt. so,parents should be responsible for their children's safety.
ZakYoungTheLibertarian

Con

Parents should not be overly concerned with their children's safety. By allowing stupid children to eliminate themselves they will be ensuring that only the strongest and smartest survive. Natural selection at it's finest.
Debate Round No. 1
Lebanon

Pro

But, it is the parent's responsibility to look out for their children's safety. Furthermore, let me take an example, if my parents didn't take care of me, i wouldn't be sitting here right now. Next, I think natural selection is for animals not for humans because no parents would want to see their child get beaten and hurt and just left them there like corpses to rot their whole life, right? So it is the parents responsibility to ensure that their child is safe and not relying to other factors. Therefore, I strongly believe that parents are responsible for their child's safety.
ZakYoungTheLibertarian

Con

If you say that the parent must be responsible for their child, what you are really endorsing is slavery. You are saying that a parent must be the slave of a child. If you permit this form of slavery, if you force obligations on individuals towards each others, you are really promoting slavery. It is fine to express an opinion that parents SHOULD take care of their kids, that they have a non binding ethical obligation to take care of their kids, but you cannot say that a parent MUST take care of their kids because then you are forcing that person's will to be subservient to your own. Ultimately the only thing we can demand of someone is that they do not hurt others or their property we cannot demand they become subservient to little brats running around crying.

Natural selection is for all creatures. If we protect our children then the stupid and lazy will survive. That stupid and lazy child could one day grow to exercise an incredible amount of power, and since they are stupid, they will not be able to exercise that power judiciously. Further, if we as a species deny natural selection, then we risk our species as a whole becoming lazy, stupid and eventually superceded by a race of super intelligent monkeys, a la planet of the apes. Is that really what you want? For the children of your children to be ruled over by chimpanzees?
Debate Round No. 2
Lebanon

Pro

Lebanon forfeited this round.
ZakYoungTheLibertarian

Con

I win my opponent didn't even bother to show up
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Avamys 4 years ago
Avamys
Weel, since a child underage has not got the power to protect himself/herself, it is reasonable that the parent has the responsibility of doing that as they know them best and provide for them.
No votes have been placed for this debate.