The Instigator
salmaayman
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Erthbeflat
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

hitting your children should be considered a crime

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 1 vote the winner is...
salmaayman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/11/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,172 times Debate No: 118133
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

salmaayman

Pro

Children are our future. We may think that when they are young the can't impact us that much, But they do. Children at the age of 6 to 12 don't come up with their ideas and actions, They copy others, So when you hit a child for whatever reason ( as a result of their actions, To discipline them, Etc. ) they will do the same thing because they saw the person they were hit by do it. They will think it normal, Which it isn't. Instead of Hitting them why not talk to them and tell them what they did was wrong or shouldn't be done. As for the parents, They should be role models for their children. They should show them what is wrong and what isn't. When a parent gives him/her self the right to physically discipline your children that makes you an abuser. Hitting them will also ruin your relationship with them, As a result if they have a problem in the future, You will be one of the least people they want to talk to. Hitting children teaches them to become hitters themselves, As stated before children copy actions and ideas.
Erthbeflat

Con

It is good to beat your children
If your child is being a retard you should be legally allowed to beat them. It is a good thing to beat children because most of them deserve to die. If you think about it, All children are good for are using up our resources and grow up to contribute to global warming. Therefore, The best way to save resources and prevent global warming is to kill children.
Debate Round No. 1
salmaayman

Pro

If you think children are supposed to be killed then why have them in the first place. Don't Bring someone in this world and them make the wish to die. NO ONE DESERVES TO DIE. How can a human being think like that. Children are the future. If you believe in what you are saying then why are you still alive till now? Why didn't your parents beat you to death because you use up resources?
Erthbeflat

Con

If my parents weren't fukking retarded then they would have beat me to death. As a small child I was constantly wasting resources, Like our pet cats when I used them to test the affects of drinking bleach for a science fair project. Humans should not be aloud to have kids, And If they do, The kids should be beat to death as soon as theyre born. Unfortunately, We live in a society of autistic pusies and almost no one is willing to beat thier children. It is my mission to do beat the kids for them though, And I have to say Ive been doing a pretty great job.
Debate Round No. 2
salmaayman

Pro

what do you mean you have been doing a god job with beating children up? How will you have a future with no children? It is useless debating with you! No one should be hit. No one should be beaten up, Especially children. Children are born so pure, But people like you turn their worlds Black. If you think that people should not be able to have children, You would not be here. How can you do that to a dog or a cat? DRINK BLEACH. What kind of person thinks like that? How did your parents allow you to do that. That is inhumane and cruel.

Please Explain how that awful mind of yours works
Erthbeflat

Con

Children do nothing but waste resources and harm the environment. Children are not born pure, They are spawn of the devil and we must do something about them. By allowing these demons to have free rein in our world, We are allowing the devil to constantly watch and influence our world. I will not drink bleach until I have contributed to the bettering of our world by killing every single one of them- because at that point I know I will be let into heaven,
Debate Round No. 3
salmaayman

Pro

The only place you will be let in is hell. Children do not harm the environment and use up resources. Louis Braille was injured at the age of 3. The accident caused him to be blind, By the age of 12 he invented Braille, A language that many people use all over the world. Chester Greenwood who invented earmuffs in 1873 which are also used all around the world. So many more examples can be set. Don't forget you were once a child. Some children actually provide more than they consume. Children don't only provide but they also bring happiness to our lives.

By the way you used the exact same reason for every argument you stated. Try changing next time. . . . . .
Erthbeflat

Con

The reason Louis Braille invented Braille was because he was blind, And he was intelligent. Although we should kill most kids, Those with an in over 140 should just be severely disabilitated so they can better contribute to scociety. This ensures that the children who are good for the world will help us at maximum efficiency, Being disabled, And the ones who are bad for the world by wasting resources will be beat to death. By doing this, We will be making the world a better place and we will all ascend to heaven.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 3 years ago
tejretics
salmaaymanErthbeflatTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct because Con seems to be trolling Pro here. This is a bit blurry, but it seems to me that the random paragraph in R1 about why kids deserve to die, particularly if they're "retards," is trolling; even if it's not, it's offensive to mentally enfeebled people. Arguments to Pro because (1) Con concedes to a standard of utilititarianism, since their arguments are based on efficiency, and Pro points out (though not explicitly) that killing children, in itself, is negative utility, which seems to outweigh Con's impacts of resource constraint and population control, (2) Pro's impacts of ruining relationships, emotional health damage, and poor role models stand completely dropped, (3) Con fails to make a case against banning the physical punishment of children, making a case for not having children at all or killing them, both of which don't negate the resolution. At this point, Pro's offense clearly outweighs; thus, I vote Pro.

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