Should parents be fined for their child having obesity???
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Anonymous285
Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
Started: | 11/8/2017 | Category: | People | ||
Updated: | 2 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
Viewed: | 799 times | Debate No: | 104850 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)
Obesity is considered a problem these days. Obesity is when a person gets overweight. But my point is, some parents are to careless about what there child eats or dinks (no offense) and I think they need to pay a price. Most people enjoy junk food, it's tasty,cheap,and unheathly. Some people are so poor, all they can afford is junk food (again, no offense). But theirs other parents that just feed their child/children without reguard to what they feed them. I think they need to pay a fine for their ignorance. It shouldn't be too big, nor too little of a fine, just enough to make them realize what they are doing. I think we should put a stop to obesity!!!
Obesity is considered a problem these days. Obesity is when a person gets overweight. But my point is, some parents are to careless about what there child eats or dinks (no offense) and I think they need to pay a price. Most people enjoy junk food, it's tasty,cheap,and unheathly. Some people are so poor, all they can afford is junk food (again, no offense). But theirs other parents that just feed their child/children without reguard to what they feed them. I think they need to pay a fine for their ignorance. It shouldn't be too big, nor too little of a fine, just enough to make them realize what they are doing. I think we should put a stop to obesity!!! "But my point is, some parents are to careless about what there child eats or dinks (no offense) and I think they need to pay a price." First off, obesity fines for parents is already a destructive motion to the parents' wealth for an unnecessary reason since parents can't police what their child is consuming 24/7. And I'm sure no parent would want an obese child, so why would they feed their kids to much junk food??? "Most people enjoy junk food, it's tasty,cheap,and unheathly." Aaaaaahhhhh!!! There it is!!! The parents would feed them too much junk food because it's cheap and the parents probably can't waste money on a fancy salad that tastes like grass!!! Plus junk food tastes delicious so why not??? Just living life to the fullest!!! "It shouldn't be too big, nor too little of a fine, just enough to make them realize what they are doing. I think we should put a stop to obesity!!!" Stopping obesity by fining the parents of the obese???!!! This is no solution to obesity because most obese people are adults (20+) that probably don't even live with their parents and I don't think going around fining their parents would solve anything because it's obviously not the parents feeding their children!!! For these reasons fining parents of the obese is no solution!!! |
![]() |
I like you argument, but im still standing for what i believe
A better solution would be for the government to make a law that doesn't allow over a certain percentage of sugar and chemicals in weight in food |
![]() |
i agree
So who wins this one??? |
![]() |
Post a Comment
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by roadrider13 2 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by roadrider13 2 years ago

Report this Comment
Posted by Bitch_Goddess 2 years ago

Report this Comment
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by QueenDaisy 2 years ago
roadrider13 | Anonymous285 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded in the final round that there was a better solution to obesity. Both parties' arguments were vague and brief and unclear- Pro, you could have suggested the money was used to fund free, healthy school meals for families who can't afford them. Con, you could have emphasised the genetic component to weight gain, and how invasive mandatory, regular tests of weight would be.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
roadrider13 | Anonymous285 | Tied | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
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 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.