the debate game

[Black pearl]

Hello all.

I had an idea for a game, the name says it all.
I thought we could have a friendly argument.

How to play:
Some one picks a subject to debate. (I’ll start)

Then people pick a side FOR or AGAINST. Pick what ever side you want, you don’t have to have a FOR or AGAINST opinion in real life. It is just about wining. but please try to keep it Even on each side for fairness.

then we start to debate. Each side makes there argument.

The debate will last one week, then who ever posts the first response to this debate gets to pick next weeks one. then the 1st person to respond to that gets to pick next etc.

the subject can be about any thing or any hypothetical situation.

I need one person to volunteer to be a 100% nonbiased judge to decide what side has won at the end of the week.
(The 1st to voiunteer will be judge)

when you post, please put what side you are on at the top then your argument.
remember this is a friendly game, so no sore losers or winners & no swearing or name calling.

As some of you may know I am a bit of an X men fan, so my chosen subject for this week is “The cure” out of the movie x men 3.

for those of you how have not seen the movie or have no knowledge about the world of
x men here is what you need to know.

People have special abilities/powers & they are referred to as “mutants”. these mutants all have different powers such as: accelerated healing, shape shifting, telekinesis, the ability to Absorb powers and memory through skin contact, flight, mind reading & mind control, the ability to walk throw solid objects & super strength etc.
“The cure” is a chemical made by the government that if injected in to the blood, suppresses “the mutant gene” and that takes the mutation away = makes a mutant “normal”.
The cure is “voluntary” (at the minute) that means on one has to take it if they don’t want to.

so lets debate,
is the cure right or wrong?

[blackcauldron85]

Since I know nothing about X-Men, I will volunteer to be the non-biased judge!

[Black pearl]

Thank you so much, that is very kind.

[Chernabog_Rocks]

I'll be standing Against the Cure I bet Plinky might be interested in this weeks debate now how to get him in here.....

[Black pearl]

FOR

In a world where people are judged, persecuted & ridiculed for being different in there faiths, looks & nationality there is no chance that “mutants” won’t come under attack by the world.

Mutants are meet with fear, hostility & violence on a very regular basis.
Although they should not have too, some mutants can blend in with their fellow mankind and avoid persecution, but for those who’s mutation is too obvious to hid this is not an option.

It is not just about “fitting in” there are also mutants with powers so extreme that they are a danger to themselves & those around them.
For example there are mutants that can absorb another persons energy just by touching them with bear skin. This can be fatal.
What kind of quality of life, can a mutant with that kind of power have, if they can not touch & connect fully with another person?
They are unable to experience the smallest of human connections that emotionally are not small at all ; a handshake, a huge, a kiss. They may never be able to have children.

There are mutants that have the ability to heal at a much, much faster speed than the average pearson.
This works by there skin & blood cells growing at a very, very fast rate. this can be very helpful.
But what if they develop cancer or some other illness?
They will suffer the effects of these things much quicker than any one else.

The cure is voluntary. No one has to take it if they don’t want it.

Every mutant should have a choice whether or not they want to have these powers.
The cure gives them that choice.

[Chernabog_Rocks]

AGAINST *Apologies in advance in case I misread anything of yours, especially my first paragraph rebuttle

No chance that they won't come under attack? Simple fact is, is that mutants come under attack every day. People constantly treat mutants like freaks, they verbally abuse them openly and in other cases groups of mutant haters will attack a mutant. Like people who are of different races, faiths or sexuality mutants can be the targets of hate and will continue to be targets until people open their minds.

Mutants who have no physical alterations are able to blend in, but why should they be forced to hide? Nobody, mutant nor human should be forced to feel like they need to hide who they are. Not all mutants should be met with fear, hostility or violence. Most mutants just want to get on with their lives and be left alone and many have no ill will towards humans so there is little to fear from them and certainly no reason to act in a hostile manner towards them.

The one case that is currently known of a mutant having the ability to absorb another persons energy is the case of the mutant Rogue. In her case she is unable to touch anyone, however she has not exhibited any ability to *control* her ability. There have been some cases for her where she has shown an ability to control her power and not hurt someone she touches, which could very well mean that she has a psychological problem that is keeping her from learning to fully control her ability. If she overcomes this problem, or any mutant with this type of power then they can enjoy the smallest human connections.

Like humans mutants are prone to getting any number of illnesses or diseases. If a mutant has the power to heal themself would they not be more immune to developing cancer? They could very use their powers to heal themselves, and perhaps with todays technology have a way of using their powers to heal cancer in humans. If the cure was used on these mutants, especially those who would be willing to help we could lose out on a way of curing cancer among other diseases, such as AIDS.

The cure is voluntary. No one has to take it if they don’t want it.

Every mutant should have a choice whether or not they want to have these powers.
The cure gives them that choice.

The cure is voluntary at the moment, but who's to say the government won't change their mind and make it mandatory for any person they feel threatened by? The government has not shown any indication of accepting mutants and have even gone as far as trying to make it mandatory for all mutants to be registered on lists against their will. One mutant, Leech, is even being used to manufacture this so called cure. Did he willingly agree to become a lab experiment, being poked with needles and having his ability used in a way he may not have wanted?

If this cure does become condoned it could pave the way for anti-mutant campaigns to increase what will happen next? Anti-mutant hysteria could rise and innocent mutants could be harmed, the same ones who only want to live life. What of those mutants who decide to fight back and defend themselves? Many people could be harmed by this and many mutants could be turned on by fellow mutants if they don't show signs of support.

Every mutant does have the choice to take the cure, but in taking the cure they are denying a part of who they are. Nobody should have to deny who they are or hide it just to fit in with the world or not become targets of hate.

[ajmrowland]

AGAINST I don't believe in forced conversion. I'm a socialist.

[blackcauldron85]

I just wanted to say that I didn't forget that I'm judging this, but I'm going to bed and want to be fully awake when judging! Tomorrow I'll judge!

[blackcauldron85]

First off, I just wanted to say that black pearl said that there is no chance that mutants won't come under attack, meaning that mutants will definitely come under attack- I think you misread that Shawn, sorry!

Mutants aren't forced to hide- hence, the Cure is voluntary.

*********

Okay, I've read through both of your arguments. I found them both interesting. I agreed with things on both, and disagreed with things on both. My feeling, though, is that black pearl's "For" argument wins. I think that one thing that made Chernabog_Rocks not win is the fact that he misinterpreted what I thought was a clear message from black pearl (I mean no offense, of course).

I think something that made black pearl win was the fact that she said, since the Cure is voluntary, mutants who think they need a better quality of life can have it. It is voluntary, so if they don't want to be treated differently towards mutants who are not supportive (a great point made by Shawn), it's on them...those mutants obviously would have to weigh their options: be accepted more by humans and possibly lose some support of their fellow mutants who are anti-Cure, or continue to possibly be persecuted by humans but have their fellow mutants be pleased with them.

As I said, you both made great points, and having no prior knowledge of the Cure, I feel that black pearl's argument for the Cure wins.

Great job, both of you!

[Chernabog_Rocks]

Congrats to Black Pearl

Yeah, even now re-reading it I still am having trouble reading it properly I think it's just the wording that throws me off, mainly the "no chance" and "wont". If it had said something like "there is a chance they will come under attack" or "there is no chance they will be attacked" then I wouldn't have messed that part up

Ames, since you were the first to respond to the debate I believe you get to choose the next topic

[blackcauldron85]

I am AGAINST for this debate. We will need someone to be FOR this debate, as well as a nonbiased judge.

Topic: Should peanut products be completely banned from schools?

Background: Many children have peanut allergies. Many school districts have completely banned peanut products, so children with the allergies will not be affected by the peanuts.

*********

I am AGAINST peanut products being completely banned from schools.

It's true that many children have peanut allergies. I feel that school cafeterias should have sections that are "peanut free", because allergic children can have severe allergic reactions if they come in contact of any sort with peanuts.

Peanut butter, though, is a cheap, nutritious lunch option. Especially with the economy the way it is, one of the cheapest and healthiest lunches a parent can provide their children includes a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Especially using coupons, a 18 oz. jar of peanut butter costs $2 or less and has about 16 servings. A 12 oz. jar of jelly also costs $2 or less and has about 17 servings. A loaf of bread costs about $1.00-$1.50 and has 9 (2-slice) servings. Doing the math, each peanut butter serving costs 12.5 cents or less, each jelly serving costs 11.8 cents or less, and each bread serving costs 17 cents or less. To make one peanut butter and jelly sandwich, it costs 41.3 cents. Throw in a granola bar (which costs about 20 cents or less a serving) and a juice box (which costs about 25 cents or less), and the total for the lunch is 86.3 cents or less. That is cheaper than the average lunch bought at school. So many families do not qualify for reduced or free school lunch, but that doesn't mean that the families that don't aren't concerned about saving money while providing their children a healthy lunch.

"Question: Can a person cause a reaction in another person with peanut allegies after they have eaten peanuts and breathe on them or breathe in the same air space as them?
Answer: In fact, it is very rare for a peanut allergic person to have a severe reaction to airborne exposure to peanut allergen. Exposure of an allergic person to touch or kissing by someone who has handled or eaten peanuts recently is more likely, but then the reaction is limited to the skin and does not lead usually to a severe, whole-body allergic response. A true, life-threatening anaphylactic reaction is most likely to occur from ingestion of peanut material."
(http://www.netwellness.org/question.cfm/42226.htm)

I mentioned earlier how peanut butter is a healthy part of a lunch. A serving of peanut butter provides (all numbers are approximate, since different brands and types of peanut butter may vary slightly) only 2g of saturated fat, and 0g trans fat, as well as 0mg cholesterol. A serving provides only 6% of the daily value for sodium intake, 15g total carbohydrate, 2g dietary fiber, only 3g of sugar, 7g of protein, 25% niacin, 8% folic acid, 4% iron, 2% calcium, 10% vitamin E, 6% vitamin B6, 15% magnesium, 6% zinc, and 10% copper.

So, as you can see, peanuts are a healthy and very affordable lunch option. Children who are allergic to peanuts should sit in a "peanut free" section of the cafeteria; since there is less of a chance of allergic reaction from having an allergic person breathe the same air as someone who has consumed peanuts (versus touching or eating peanuts themselves, or having someone touch them who ate peanuts), the allergic children shouldn't be in much trouble at all. Like with any medical condition, children with peanut allergies should be taught how to manage their allergy, and should know not to eat peanuts or touch peanuts, and they should be aware of who has consumed peanuts before playing with them, as a safety precaution.

[Chernabog_Rocks]

I'll be the nonbiased judge

[ajmrowland]

Against. Kids enjoy peanut-related products, including peanut butter, trail mix, and many desserts. Just because the school can't even make the proper effort to keep track of a few kids with allergies does not mean that all of the kids should pay for it. I say the school should make more effort because my school doesn't realise that I'm only part-time, even though it should be there in the records. I am also quite certain that those kids who are allergic to peanuts can put up with the idea that other kids eat them. You see this every day, and I believe that all public schools should have a proper allergy-prevention system set up that is regularly inspected by the government, and that can also properly regulate the sales of snack items, and alert these kids if peanuts are in any of the foods made for the day's lunch.

[blackcauldron85]

Um, not to be rude, but I already did the AGAINST debate...we need someone to do the FOR debate...

[Escapay]

I'll take the For side, simply for the sake of providing the other side.

Let schools not allow peanut products from the cafeteria lunches as those are accessible to all students, but allow a parent to include a peanut butter sandwich or some honey roasted peanuts in their children's lunchbox. That way, kids who want peanut products (and aren't allergic) won't be deprived. Whether or not they share it with allergic kids...well, that's a risk they (the kid, not the school) has to take. But honestly, who'd share their peanut butter sandwich anyway?

Bee tea double-you, do kids still use lunch boxes?

albert

[ajmrowland]

Um, not to be rude, but I already did the AGAINST debate...we need someone to do the FOR debate...

Oh, I thought there was more than one allowed. I should look at the rules again.

[blackcauldron85]

Just FYI, the edit I just made to my argument post was just a mistake I had made in the "Background" section (that I looked for but couldn't find before posting), not in my argument.

[Black pearl]

FOR(just for the sake of the argument)
I think peanuts should be banned from schools for the simple fact that in this day & age bullies & other ignorant students might put peanut products in the lunch of the kid that is allergic to peanuts, if they don't have easy access to peanuts they wound be able to do this so easy. they will have to go out of there was to & then they woun't be able to clam it was an accident so easily.

[quote=blackcauldron85]It's true that many children have peanut allergies. I feel that school cafeterias should have sections that are "peanut free", because allergic children can have severe allergic reactions if they come in contact of any sort with peanuts.[/quote]

This sounds like a really good idea, but people make mistakes, what if food containing peanuts accidently gets put out with the peanut free food, that could prove fatal.


I just want to say thank you blackcauldron85 for judging the very 1st debate!
and yes there is more than one argument allowed for the same side, just try to keep it fair & even if you can

[Chernabog_Rocks]

Haven't forgotten this thread, I'll be back later on today with who wins once I've had time to review the four arguments and mull it over

[Chernabog_Rocks]

Good points all around everyone, in the end though I declare that Amy's "Against" arguement wins. I thought that it was rather well done and researched.

Towards Scaps, I don't think lunchboxes are used anymore. Personally I just went home to eat, wasn't that far to walk.

Anyways, since I don't really have a topic in mind whoever wants to keep the game going can suggest one in my place