CreateDebate


Debate Info

50
43
YES! OF COURSE! NO! What r u talking about??
Debate Score:93
Arguments:91
Total Votes:99
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 YES! OF COURSE! (47)
 
 NO! What r u talking about?? (33)

Debate Creator

Joel_Mathews(2284) pic



Should Trump ban junk food at schools in America?


Watch this video and it will tell you everything you will need to know and why I created this debate.
This is shameful for all americans. 

YES! OF COURSE!

Side Score: 50
VS.

NO! What r u talking about??

Side Score: 43
1 point

If the schools are allowed to serve junk food yes it should be banned and I think this should apply to all schools worldwide as child obesity is a huge problem worldwide ; to allow a child to become obese through overeating and the eating of junk food is child abuse .

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
Jace(5222) Disputed
2 points

If you think removing junk food from schools is the solution then you are woefully ignorant of the problem. You're treating the problem way too far down the line, and at the expense of individual autonomy and states' rights.

The problem is the food system infrastructure itself. Federal subsidies and similar programs have culminated in the inclusion of excessive amounts of sugar and corn products in our food. Not only does this seriously limit the healthy options which exist on the market, but it ensures that the affordable products are also the unhealthy ones. When this pairs with income disparity, you get an obesity epidemic.

Moreover, given the limited funding schools receive it isn't even realistic that they could budget healthy food into their meal programs since doing so would require going outside the (broken) food infrastructure model. There are a few select magnet schools that receive special funding, but as a sweeping policy it's not very feasible. Nor do I think using schools to accomplish social goals outside of education is necessarily a good thing, especially if it comes at the expense of actually doing something substantive with our policies.

Pair it with limited funding for schools, and you get unhealthy diet programs; school systems simply cannot afford to provide healthy meals outside of the mainstream food infrastructure system on the budgets they have.

Side: NO! What r u talking about??
Dermot(5736) Disputed
1 point

I never said it was the solution I said I agreed with the removing of junk food from school menus ; it's up to parents to make sure their children eat correctly and healthily .

Over here children bring their own food mostly to schools , school canteens mostly sell healthy foods which students pay for but yet their is still a huge problem with child obesity as parents feed their children too much and the wrong type of foods .

Bottom line is it's up to parents whether their children are obese or not , if their obese it's child abuse plain and simple

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
blueprint318(16) Disputed
1 point

You state that this is taking away personal freedoms, how so? Wouldn't it give kids more freedom? Think about this, I have known kids who wish to eat healthy but they are very limited in their food selection. They are secluded to only the food their parents buy. If this proposal were to happen, they could choose from the given healthy school food or they could bring their own lunch, eating whatever they wish. This isn't banning junk food in the way that it seems that you imply.

Side: YES! OF COURSE!

Yes! The video shows all the evidence why we should ban junk food in america

Side: YES! OF COURSE!

It is either you live a long healthy life.... or a short fat life

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
1 point

Yes, they should only be consuming Trump Water and Trump vitamin supplements.

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
1 point

The school chooses what is for lunch. So if I was a school, I might feel morally responsible (responsible to make the better choice) for providing a close to perfect meal. I might think that I totally failed at my job if I provided a weak lunch. Keep in mind that a healthy meal can still entail pizza, spaghetti, tacos, etc. Those meals aren't unhealthy. But how about some fresh basil, onion, etc. Don't make it bland. From my experience, antioxidants are the missing ingredient in school lunches.

Side: YES! OF COURSE!

Absolutely. The government should not be contributing to the same epidemic that is costing so many lives and costing so much taxpayer money.

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
2 points

Yes I agree totally ; schools also have a duty of care to children we expect our children to be educated in a clean , safe environment schools should be encouraged to take responsibility for serving healthy nutritious foods to children as part of their duty of care .

No offence but it baffles me the way a sizeable proportion of Americans get so annoyed at anyone suggesting this and the assumption seems to be that there rights are being infringed upon which is bizzare ; also this is a worldwide problem that needs to be addressed .

Side: YES! OF COURSE!

Yes, I agree. What is insane to me is the way that in one part of the world, people are dying from overeating but in another part, people are starving to death. Seems to me that the world needs to work on creating a state of homeostasis when it comes to such a thing.

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
1 point

Because paternalism and federalism are both so fantastic....

Side: NO! What r u talking about??
Sitar(3680) Disputed
1 point

We need to promote healthier lifestyles...........................................................

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
Jace(5222) Disputed
2 points

No, we really don't. The problem is not that people have no regard for their health. The problem is that our food infrastructure policies make eating healthy challenging, if not outright impossible for some people. This is an issue of federal food policy and poverty.

Banning junk food at schools is not going to solve either. That is just more paternalistic drivel to keep people from focusing on the actual issues; if people believe their government is taking care of them they start thinking they don't need to themselves and stop considering that maybe the government is a part of the problem.

Side: NO! What r u talking about??
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

Who needs to promote healthier lifestyles ? ..................................................

Side: NO! What r u talking about??
1 point

What are you talking about? Please give sufficient evidence

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
Jace(5222) Disputed
2 points

I was being snarky more than substantive, but I can elaborate.

The idea motivating the banning of junk food at schools is paternalistic because it situate the state as responsible and legitimate in restricting the options of individuals rather than permitting them to make their own choices, generally on the basis of not believing people can or should make their own choices. Not only do I find that personally offensive, but I don't think it's philosophically defensible because there is no objective criterion of harm which makes paternalism fundamentally about opposing one's one concept of the good onto the personal choices and lives of others for no reason other than that you think it's good.

The policy would be federalist because the proposal is for the whole country, making it a federal policy. I'm generally against federalist powers where they are not strictly necessary, and I hardly think this counts as necessary. For a start, there is no reason the individual states could not opt to do this or not on their own autonomy.

Side: NO! What r u talking about??

Banning junk food is useless, instead just demand better food in the cafeterias.

Side: NO! What r u talking about??
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

When did demanding better food in cafeterias reach a point you should be concerned with it ????????????????????????????

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
shoutoutloud(4303) Clarified
1 point

Today .

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
1 point

banning junk food is just one step to better and healthier food in cafeterias

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
1 point

If we look at history, banning stuff only makes the matter worse.

Side: NO! What r u talking about??

I don't see it solving the problem. I also feel that the health of a person is the business of that person. No need to control their lifestyle and eating habits.

Side: NO! What r u talking about??
Dermot(5736) Disputed
2 points

Yes the health of a person is a persons choice , the health of a minor should not be an irresponsible parents choice as the stuffing of a child that's obese is child abuse .

Side: YES! OF COURSE!
1 point

This entails the judging of a parents choice of food. Are you saying that there is a defined right and wrong way to eat?

Side: NO! What r u talking about??