The Instigator
What50
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
kyleniel
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

We should let Africans eat Fat People

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...
kyleniel
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2018 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 938 times Debate No: 116700
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

What50

Pro

Cannabilism you are thinking is so bad. I can prove to you why we can do this, and should do this.



Everyone is doing it.
Everyone does it. In the Animal kingdom many species indulge in cannabilism, even our closest relatives do the same thing. Why are we the exeception? Animals do it for petty reasons such as sex, but what we are doing is purley altruistic, and it's to let the people in need to indulge, and give them food.


Sweet, Sweet Nutrients
Human flesh has plenty of red meat, and fat. You might say, that is bad, fat is bad. Yes fat can be bad, but remember, these people are starving out there. Giving them fat will give them much more energy and help them gain weight, which is a good thing. Malnutrition is a bad thing, and I am willing to bet these people don't have enough fat in their systems, so the best solution for it? Human flesh, with it's red meat, we can provide protein, and also give them fat to gain weight, and use as energy.

One for all
Okay lets get the elpehant out of the room, and into the stoamchs of the poor, poor people starving in Africa. We can get the really fat ones, like orca fat, whale fat, a literal land whale with 2 legs. Yes, these people can feed a whole village for a week!

Good for the enviroment!
Okay, you might ask, how is it good for the enviroment? Well with these fat people, when they are eaten, they will release CO2 back into the enviroment, food for the plants, and the plants will than bring us fresh air. With less fat people with their huge volume, we have more space in the world, meaning we can build less, and deystroy less buildings. With less of these fat people eating all the animals, and using our precious resources. We essentially have them use less energy, less food, less water, less space, less co2 production, and we can help the villages in Africa. Thats killing 2 birds with one stone.

Get in shape!
Every month we will pick fat people to be allocated the villages of Africa, in terms of weeks. This will be an incentive for fat people to get in shape, by eating less, and buying more healthy food. They can workout and get exercise equipment or going to the gym. Now what do all these have in common? They have them paying money, which instead of going it to fat inducing stores like McDonalds they can go into healthy places, improving the economy, and with less customers for McDonalds they have to opt to go foods much more healthier. With this, people can be more inspired to workout more, making this world less fatty and more fit.

Enjoy the last momants
Before these people be allocated to Africa they get to spend their few weeks, or days doing what they want. We will of course give them one last meal, and we will also give them a day to do what they need to do.

Better Humans
We can ensure that we have better humans. With less fat people, more fit people can give their genes, thus making better humans. Also by better humans we are essentially punishing them for their indulgence, lazyness, and selfishness. Since obesity is the top killer, they are gonna die anyways, at least put them to use. Fat people most of them don't contribute to society, and the least they can do is allowing a African Village to survive.

Conclusion:
By allowing this plan of action to take we are essentially making better ethnical humans, contribuation to society, better economics, less energy being wasted, being ethically correct, solving the hunger crisis in the African Countrys. What are we waiting for? Lets do this for Society, and African Children sake!
kyleniel

Con

1. Appeal to popularity.

2. There are nutrients in food that goes to waste that can be used.

3. I highly doubt that one obese human can feed a whole village, much less sufficiently.

4. Why don't we just kill off China? That would also help fight climate change.

5. There are better ways to get them to lose weight.

6. Giving them a prize for forcing them death isn't making it a good thing.

7. Again, we can change humanity through alternative means.

Conclusion: Your argument is bad and you should feel bad.
Debate Round No. 1
What50

Pro

"1. Appeal to popularity."
The argument I tried to make is that people think Cannabilism is unnatrual. Cannabilism is perfectly natural and that was the argument I tried to frame.

"2. There are nutrients in food that goes to waste that can be used."
Could you provide examples? You still haven't touched about their malnutrition, and how they can gain weight with protein and fat. I ask Con if he against this, does this mean he is against them gaining weight to be at a good weight?


"3.3. I highly doubt that one obese human can feed a whole village, much less sufficiently."
Thats why I suggest the really fat ones, the ones you see in 600 pound life shows. Those humans do exist, and we can use them to feed them. It also depends on the size of the villages, if needed we will have to send multiple fatties into the villages for food, so it really isn't much.



"4. Why don't we just kill off China? That would also help fight climate change."
Yes that is true, but that would cost more lives. I ask Con how would he accomplish a task? Nuclear missles? War? Killing off China would mean war. Con still hasn't touched my points on using the fatties for food we can help the enviroment. He also use the comment "That would also help fight climate change." He essentially conceded to my enviromental argument, by saying that would also help.


5. "There are better ways to get them to lose weight."
Could Con give examples? With my way they get an incentive to lose weight. This is a good quick efficent way to get them to lose weight or they will be shipped to Africa. He also acknowledges the ways and doesn't even attempt to refute them.


6. "Giving them a prize for forcing them death isn't making it a good thing."
Con is misinterprating what I said. I said that they were going to get a last meal, and they will be given a day to make their dues, and do what they want. It's a not a prize, it's mercy, and ethical to give them one final day. I personally think it is very ethical and correct.


7. "Again, we can change humanity through alternative means."
Like what? Con has made statements with no arguments or examples to make. I also ask Con, is he going to attempt to refute my claims that this can change humanity by telling them to be less selfish, or something? With my way we get straight to the point, and we stay confident with our beleifs.


In conclusion:
Con hasn't given any solutions that can fix the problems that my soluation attempts
Given statements without presenting examples that could refute my soluation
Has never or barley touched any of my points that my arguments gain
Offers no real solution to counter mine
Conceded to my enviromental argument

I ask the readers with my way we can have better humans, we can help the food crisis, we can stop animals getting needlessly slaughter, we can reduce our enviromental problems, we can have a more fit nation. Or we can listein to Cons solutions, which is nothing in he presented. Do you want to follow Cons idea? Because right now we are following Cons idea, and look what is happening. Food crisis that keeps on getting increased by a increasing fat nation. No real incentive to exercise. We tell them to be body positive, and accept they are fat. These fatties have no reason to exercise. We offer them countless reasons such as heart problems, digestive problems for years, and years. AND YET WE ARE A INCREASING FAT NATION. My idea is bold, my idea is controversial, but it offers a soluation, a solution that gets results, unlike Cons way of thinking. Vote con.
kyleniel

Con

1. Appeal to Nature then.

2. There are nutrients in food that goes to waste. Examples are the food in trash bins in grocery stores and restaurants. And there is much weight to be gained as the wasted food includes healthy and unhealthy alike.

3. I still have doubts about those claims, as there many parts of people that are inedible.

4. It would cost more if we just set off an already existing plague and some mustard gas into the vents.

5. Many fat people feel that they are shamed by society into losing weight. We could start making those claims legitimate with smear campaigns using white, grey, and black propoganda.

6. Well it still doesn't justify sending them to death.
Debate Round No. 2
What50

Pro

1. Appeal to Nature then.
I ask con, how is that a bad thing? I am merely countering the argument saying that cannabilism is unnatrual because it is natural.


2. There are nutrients in food that goes to waste. Examples are the food in trash bins in grocery stores and restaurants. And there is much weight to be gained as the wasted food includes healthy and unhealthy alike.
You are saying that these poor people in Africa should eat our garbage? You still haven't touched the nutritional benefits of eating people, it is much more safer to eat people, they just have to cook them.


3. I still have doubts about those claims, as there many parts of people that are inedible.
Here is a list of edible body parts in the human body
teeth=36 calories
skin=10,278
skeleton=25,331
torso+head=5,418
thigh=13,354
calf=4,486
upper arm=7,451
forearm==1,664
adipose tissue=49,938

https://www.pbs.org...

As you can see the nutritional value of humans are well suited to feed a village in Africa.


5. Many fat people feel that they are shamed by society into losing weight. We could start making those claims legitimate with smear campaigns using white, grey, and black propoganda.
I ask you, what if they just don't care? We live in a society where bullying is wrong, so how could you use those campigns to shift with a antibullying society into a pro bullying society?

6. Well it still doesn't justify sending them to death.
Could you touch on them? You still haven't touched my points on my justifcation with it. All you are saying is statements with nothing to back it up.
kyleniel

Con

1. It is wrong to say that something is good if it is natural. Viruses are natural, floods are natural, Sugar is natural. On the flipside, medicine, robotics, and eyeglasses are unnatural, but they are good nonetheless.

2. Yeah, maybe they should eat our garbage, especially before it's safe and thrown out. It's a known fact that usable food is thrown away, Plus there are ways to make eating garbage as safe as eating people.

3. Those nutritional requirements can be met by food from the trash.

5. We can always go deeper. People will also be more willing to change than you'd think.

6. Up until one part of your argument, you did nothing for justification.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
Feed Nazi types, And neo nazi square heads to hogs.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 3 years ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
I think What50 is now a fascist for some reason.
Posted by pali1 3 years ago
pali1
Grammarly helps with spelling and grammar.
Posted by sem2093 3 years ago
sem2093
I agree. The more freedom, the more feeling of free will. While I'd assume allowing it wouldn't change the currant rate of these instances, it would be no more harmful than letting people people choose to consume sewer rats if they'd like. Given the fat person has food nearby, they are most likely less appetizing than a dead rat in their pantry would be to an African.
Posted by canis 3 years ago
canis
2 out of 3 in the US would be gone. They are full of chemicals and toxins .. About 1 out of 2 worldwide..Result..1 out of 1 will get poisened.. 0.0 humans left..Does it matter ? No to whom ?
Posted by What50 3 years ago
What50
It's a spelling problem not a grammar problem. I get very passionate with my debates, and yes I do make grammar and spelling mistakes in the heat of typing. I also like to comment I mean vote pro instead of vote con, my bad. In my future I will proof read.
Posted by pali1 3 years ago
pali1
Says the person who spelled Moment incorrectly. It is Moment, not Momant. Get Grammarly!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BertrandsTeapot 3 years ago
BertrandsTeapot
What50kylenielTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did a better job across all dimensions, despite the general absurdity of the debate. He/she remained composed in the face of frustrating, fallacious arguments on the part of Pro which were also unsubstantiated and illogical.
Vote Placed by factandevidence1234 3 years ago
factandevidence1234
What50kylenielTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't really disprove anything. And supporting cannibalism? What?

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.