CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Why arnt feminists outraged by Bloombergs ban on sugary drinks?
If the feminist argument for abortion is "We have the right to choose what to do with our bodies," why are they not speaking out against the new york city mayors ban on large sugary drinks? He is effectively telling women (and men) that they cant have that choice. Is it because the law will effect women and men equally, that they find no problem in it, or is it because they (feminist) think large sodas are bad for people and there for the phrase "we have the right to choose" dosent apply.
"We have the right to choose what to do with our bodies" yes you do, but that fertilized isn't your body, its the childs... But feminists shouldn't be mad about the ban on drinks, its not a womens rights issue, we should all be mad about Bloomberg telling people what they can and can't eat.
I didn't say he banned soda, I said he banned "soda sizes" now this wrong for two reasons 1. its people's job to regulate the quantity of soda they drink, not the mayor's 2. soda, like anything else, is cheaper in quantity, so it will cost more money to get the same amount of soda.
1. its people's job to regulate the quantity of soda they drink, not the mayor's
You're right, and Bloomberg has done nothing to change that.
2. soda, like anything else, is cheaper in quantity, so it will cost more money to get the same amount of soda.
Exactly. Therein lies the (perceived) purpose of his plan: reduce consumption through cost-hikes without actually doing anything to raise them. Clever, really. Completely ridiculous, but clever.
Feminists are interested in women's rights issues. They probably figure this is someone else's battle. I'm sure if you asked for their help they would support you.
So feminist are "separate" from everyone els? I would think that is contradictory to their quest to be "equal". It is their problem just as much as it is anyone else's otherwise I think they are a joke.
They can still have another medium if them need more, you can't have half an abortion and then decide you want another.
When I was in America I noticed that what we drink as super-size is your large and our large is your medium and they stopped serving the super-size here years ago.
Currently women can have a abortion until they are 23 week pregnant (medium size?!)
"When I was in America I noticed that what we drink as super-size is your large and our large is your medium and they stopped serving the super-size here years ago"
So your sizes are better then ours? LOL. Its cheaper to buy one large drink then two med drinks, what if a family or a couple want to share a drink, you and Bloomberge want to make them pay more for it, and people wonder what caused the rescission ( FYI, the government making stupid laws like this one).
Currently women can have a abortion until they are 23 week pregnant (medium size?!)
That would be a medium fetus not a medium abortion.
So your sizes are better then ours?
No, just letting you know it happened years ago here and nobody was bothered, not that I support that type of measure.
Its cheaper to buy one large drink then two med drinks, what if a family or a couple want to share a drink,
Well I guess they're out of luck then.
you and Bloomberge want to make them pay more for it,
From where do you assume that I wish any of this?
and people wonder what caused the rescission ( FYI, the government making stupid laws like this one).
No, it was people lending money they didn't have, like banks lending money to investors to buy shares in the same banks, institutions giving 100% mortgages to people with no credit history and such.
First of all, you're comparing a surgary drink to an abortion.... A DRINK to something that can effect you for eighteen plus years....
I find them to have no similarities whatsoever.
And you can still buy drinks, just not large.
Not to mention this doesn't just effect woman, so why would a feminist group rally against it? Another group may, but this isn't what a feminist group is against.
Yes, it effects women, but it doesn't effect JUST women. Which is the point of the feminists, they protest against things that are gender oriented. This is not.
And as a woman myself, I don't often buy large anything. I never finish them if I do. lol
So, hypothetically, if men could get pregnant and the government said abortion was completely illegal, feminists wouldn't consider it a topic because women and men (on this issue) would be equal?
1. Its not just the womens child its the mans to, they both made it.
I'd let this be a valid reason if it weren't so easy for men to leave and NOT take care of the kid. And if the man can take full responsibility if the woman doesn't want to take care of it.
2. Although it is their kid, you shouldn't have the right to kill your child.
Not going to reply to this one because this isn't an abortion debate....
"I'd let this be a valid reason if it weren't so easy for men to leave and NOT take care of the kid. And if the man can take full responsibility if the woman doesn't want to take care of it."
That is a completely sexist comment, it is just as physically "easy" for a women to not take care of a kid then it is for a man. For a man to only have rights to his child if a woman decides to have it and doesn't want to take care of it also seems very sexist.
It is sexist. I agree. But I disagree that it's easy for a woman not to take care of a child. If not for the child's whole life, she still has to deal with the nine month pregnancy of a child she doesn't want.
"I'd let this be a valid reason if it weren't so easy for men to leave and NOT take care of the kid. And if the man can take full responsibility if the woman doesn't want to take care of it." Most men don't leave and even if they did, its not reason to kill a child, whenever you have sex you take the risk of STD's and having kids, so if a girl doesn't take birth control pills and then dates a guy who is to cheap to buy a condom, they didn't have bad luck, its their fault.
Also I guess you could say its "easy" for women to just kill their kid and not take care of it.
and even if they did, its not reason to kill a child, whenever you have sex you take the risk of STD's and having kids, so if a girl doesn't take birth control pills and then dates a guy who is to cheap to buy a condom, they didn't have bad luck, its their fault.
You do realize that you could be taking birth control correctly and STILL get pregnant.
Also I guess you could say its "easy" for women to just kill their kid and not take care of it.
No. It's not easy to have an abortion. But it is an option that I would like to keep.
"You do realize that you could be taking birth control correctly and STILL get pregnant." yes I do, its called sex, what dose sex do? It makes offspring, so again, your taking that risk, but if you use a condom and birth control its very unlikely.
"No. It's not easy to have an abortion. But it is an option that I would like to keep." You shouldn't have the option because you are ending someone's life, if you get pregnant than have the kid, on the off chance the guy leaves theres plenty of other ways to take care of a child.
Pretty much. Not saying they wouldn't consider it an issue, just the feminist groups wouldn't be the ones protesting it. Though women FROM feminist groups may. The group itself does not deal with issues like that.
Um...are you equating buying two small drinks instead of one large one with abortion?
I'm not sure why feminists don't see having to get two soda fillings to satisfy their sugar cravings instead of one as a serious women's rights issue. Or for that matter...as a rights issue at all. Frankly, I don't even see the issue as noteworthy.