frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


Communities




Should we humanely kill the starving in third world Countries?

Debate Information

Should We Humanely Kill The Starving In Third World Countries

Would it not be a viable and cost effective solution rather than watch them die slowly and miserably from afar ? 

Everyday we we can watch on t v and media people starving of hunger in third world countries ,  we know we can only save a certain amount , so is it preferable to let them die slow agonising deaths or introduce cost effective and quick ways of elimination and thus alleviate the suffering of a slow death  ? 
Max_Air29BaconToespassedbillwalterbasomeone234ale5
«1



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • Max_Air29Max_Air29 84 Pts   -  
    Humans in theirs would countires or any country should not be killed in any way. Resources, etc. that help the homeless in all countries globally should be created. 
    passedbill
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Max_Air29

    But you haven’t answered what I asked as in do you agree it’s” better” to watch them die slowly rather than  finish them off quickly ?

    We cannot save them all so why let them die slowly ?
    passedbill
  • passedbillpassedbill 80 Pts   -  
    Humans shouldn’t be killed under any or most conditions. Food and resources should be provided by the government, organizations, etc. to help the starving. Starving people shouldn’t be killed.
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    It would be better to kill the obese in developed countries and reallocate the food that would have gone to them to the poor.
    Fascismdrodgers
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited March 2018
    @passedbill

    Humans shouldn’t be killed under any or most conditions. Food and resources should be provided by the government, organizations, etc. to help the starving. Starving people shouldn’t be killed.

    Yes , I would prefer if they weren’t killed but you’re avoiding the question , if we cannot possibly save them why not eliminate them ?
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited March 2018
    @Ampersand

    It would be better to kill the obese in developed countries and reallocate the food that would have gone to them to the poor.

    But time is off the essence we cannot wait for fatties to get obese can we?

  • walterbawalterba 59 Pts   -  
    Humans shouldn’t be killed for being hungry. The issue of hunger can possibly globally be fixed if the government and organizations increase agriculture and distribute more food for a low price to third world countries, etc.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @walterba ;

    Yes I realize that but you haven’t answered the question , also you’re only saying what’s been said ad nauseum for the last century and it still remains the same 
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
    @Ampersand

    It would be better to kill the obese in developed countries and reallocate the food that would have gone to them to the poor.

    But time is off the essence we cannot wait for fatties to get obese can we?

    Fatties are obese.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Ampersand

    There is a difference medically ......The difference between obesity and being overweight comes down to Body Mass Index (BMI). A BMI of 30 or higher is considered obeseOverweight is defined by a BMI of 25-29.9. ... BMI is used because, for most people, it correlates with their amount of body

    overweight people are deemed fatties obesity takes it up a level 
  • BaconToesBaconToes 236 Pts   -  
    I believe that no human should be killed for circumstances completely out of their control. 
    i fart cows
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  

    @Dee
    So watch them die slowly and miserably from afar ? 

  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
    @Ampersand

    There is a difference medically ......The difference between obesity and being overweight comes down to Body Mass Index (BMI). A BMI of 30 or higher is considered obeseOverweight is defined by a BMI of 25-29.9. ... BMI is used because, for most people, it correlates with their amount of body

    overweight people are deemed fatties obesity takes it up a level 
    Semantic argument. I never specified medically obese according to the BMI index.

    I said kill the obese. Obese = fatties.
  • BaconToesBaconToes 236 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
    @Ampersand

    There is a difference medically ......The difference between obesity and being overweight comes down to Body Mass Index (BMI). A BMI of 30 or higher is considered obeseOverweight is defined by a BMI of 25-29.9. ... BMI is used because, for most people, it correlates with their amount of body

    overweight people are deemed fatties obesity takes it up a level 

    i fart cows
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
     @Ampersand

    Semantic argument. I never specified medically obese according to the BMI index.

    I said kill the obese. Obese = fatties.


    Why is there a different kind of obese ? 

    You’re now attempting to re - define the term to suit your narrative , so tell me using your logic is a skinny person  Anorexic ? 
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
     @Ampersand

    Semantic argument. I never specified medically obese according to the BMI index.

    I said kill the obese. Obese = fatties.


    Why is there a different kind of obese ? 

    You’re now attempting to re - define the term to suit your narrative , so tell me using your logic is a skinny person  Anorexic ? 
    There is a different kind of obese because that's the English language - words have multiple usages and meanings. Can you cite a single mainstream dictionary which gives the definition of obese as solely "Having a BMI of 30 or over" as you have used it?

    No? Then you're the one trying to redefine words with your semantic argument.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    There is a different kind of obese because that's the English language - words have multiple usages and meanings. Can you cite a single mainstream dictionary which gives the definition of obese as solely "Having a BMI of 30 or over" as you have used it?

    No? Then you're the one trying to redefine words with your semantic argument.


    Nonsense ,  there is not a different “ kind of obese “ if there is maybe you can prove it ?

    How do doctors define if one is obese ? Do you think B M I may be an indication?

    I’m not having a semantic argument   I’m merely correcting you on your useage of terms you do not understand 


  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
    There is a different kind of obese because that's the English language - words have multiple usages and meanings. Can you cite a single mainstream dictionary which gives the definition of obese as solely "Having a BMI of 30 or over" as you have used it?

    No? Then you're the one trying to redefine words with your semantic argument.


    Nonsense ,  there is not a different “ kind of obese “ if there is maybe you can prove it ?

    How do doctors define if one is obese ? Do you think B M I may be an indication?

    I’m not having a semantic argument   I’m merely correcting you on your useage of terms you do not understand 


    LOL, of course I can prove my meaning of it:

    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/obese?s=t

    adjective
    1.
    very fat or overweight; corpulent.

    No mention of BMI at all. Why can't you back up your definition and why did you dodge the question? It's super easy to do if you're using real mainstream definitions like me.

    You're awfully defensive of fat people.
    BaconToes
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Ampersand ;

    But you said there are different meanings of the term obese , which is another example of a statement you cannot back up 

    Where is your proof of this claim ?

    There is a difference medically which I’ve proved making you incorrect again 

    How you ascertain I’m defensive of fat people is beyond me when you’re the sulking at me using the term obese , trying to tell us something are you ?

  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @someone234

    i am good aren’t I Nom ? How are you buddy and thanks for the bleating ....sorry I mean  greeting 
  • someone234someone234 647 Pts   -  
    @Dee are you factmachine or something? I am not quantumhead. I was first known as prodigee.
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
    @Ampersand ;

    But you said there are different meanings of the term obese , which is another example of a statement you cannot back up 

    Where is your proof of this claim ?

    There is a difference medically which I’ve proved making you incorrect again 

    How you ascertain I’m defensive of fat people is beyond me when you’re the sulking at me using the term obese , trying to tell us something are you ?

    I have provided a dictionary definition for the term that is separate from the definition you claim is correct. Ergo there are multiple definitions. You are claiming you are the lord master of the english language and everyone can only use your definitions but can't back it up.

    You're awfully invested in your semantic argument so can only assume you have an undue attachment to obese people.
    BaconToes
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Ampersand

    “ I have provided a dictionary definition for the term that is separate from the definition you claim is correct. Ergo there are multiple definitions. You are claiming you are the lord master of the english language and everyone can only use your definitions but can't back it up.”

    “ You're awfully invested in your semantic argument so can only assume you have an undue attachment to obese people.””



    Original statement was fatties = obese , I corrected you on your error making you incorrect yet again 

    There are not “ multiple definitions “ as grossly overweight is obese , I know this is tricky for you but please try and keep up , and actually I backed my argument up from the off unlike you

    I actually am the lord and master in these matters and indeed most others 


    You projecting your obsession with obesity on to me  is amusing seeing as you are the one who’s virtually stalking me at this stage 
    BaconToes
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
     @someone234

    “ @Dee are you factmachine or something? I am not quantumhead. I was first known as prodigee “ 

    No I’m not factmachine I’m Darwin , anyway no worries no harm meant
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:
    @Ampersand

    “ I have provided a dictionary definition for the term that is separate from the definition you claim is correct. Ergo there are multiple definitions. You are claiming you are the lord master of the english language and everyone can only use your definitions but can't back it up.”

    “ You're awfully invested in your semantic argument so can only assume you have an undue attachment to obese people.””



    Original statement was fatties = obese , I corrected you on your error making you incorrect yet again 

    There are not “ multiple definitions “ as grossly overweight is obese , I know this is tricky for you but please try and keep up , and actually I backed my argument up from the off unlike you

    I actually am the lord and master in these matters and indeed most others 


    You projecting your obsession with obesity on to me  is amusing seeing as you are the one who’s virtually stalking me at this stage 
    You claim relied on your definition of obese being the sole correct one and as shown with evidence to back me up rather than just the silly claims you make - you're wrong.

    That you repeat such claims multiple times when you've already been proven wrong and can offer no evidence - even when asked to provide it multiple times - is somewhat bizarre, as is your defensiveness when someone points this our . Are you a very fat person yourself?
    BaconToes
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  

    @Dee

    “You claim relied on your definition of obese being the sole correct one and as shown with evidence to back me up rather than just the silly claims you make - you're wrong.”

    “That you repeat such claims multiple times when you've already been proven wrong and can offer no evidence - even when asked to provide it multiple times - is somewhat bizarre, as is your defensiveness when someone points this our . Are you a very fat person yourself?”

    Your claim was fatties = obese you were corrected and now you’re sulking , my definition is correct and destroyed your assertions 

    That I corrected you so many times when I’ve proven you  wrong and can offer no evidence - even when asked to provide it multiple times ....... you’re incredibly annoyed at your weight issues and your anger would be best directed to maybe hitting the treadmill 
    , are you very , very fat = obese ? 

  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Dee said:

    @Dee

    “You claim relied on your definition of obese being the sole correct one and as shown with evidence to back me up rather than just the silly claims you make - you're wrong.”

    “That you repeat such claims multiple times when you've already been proven wrong and can offer no evidence - even when asked to provide it multiple times - is somewhat bizarre, as is your defensiveness when someone points this our . Are you a very fat person yourself?”

    Your claim was fatties = obese you were corrected and now you’re sulking , my definition is correct and destroyed your assertions 

    That I corrected you so many times when I’ve proven you  wrong and can offer no evidence - even when asked to provide it multiple times ....... you’re incredibly annoyed at your weight issues and your anger would be best directed to maybe hitting the treadmill 
    , are you very , very fat = obese ? 

    Correcting me would involve making an actual point rather than just delusional thinking.

    You won't accept dictionary definitions as the real definitions of words and even then you can only argue with semantics and trying to repeat my statements as if they were your own.


    BaconToes
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Ampersand

    Your failure to acknowledge and accept being corrected is something you need to work on , from the start you've said Fatties = Obese I corrected you several times and in an attempt to save face you resort to attempting to deny that your " point " was destroyed from the off

    i note I'm not the only one who has corrected your re -invention of what you said opposed to what you actually think you said as in your attempts to weasel your way out of the gun debate 


    Your  anger is misdirected and you should accept your correction and move on 
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    Is english not your first language? You after all don't seem able to understand the language even when given dictionary definitions?
    BaconToes
  • FredsnephewFredsnephew 361 Pts   -  
    @Dee ;

    Why don't we humanely feed the starving in third world countries?
    Dee
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
     @Ampersand

    Well considering you do not know what or how obesity is measured as in your Fat = Obese "observation " ,meaning in your world Skinny = Anorexic which is amusing to say the least 

    lets educate you yet again asin how is obesity measured ..,

    Traditional measures. There are a number of different approaches to measuring obesity. The most common approach to measuring obesity is the Body Mass Index (BMI), which is calculated by dividing a person's weight in kilograms by his or her height in metres squared (kg/m2).


    Dont thank me it's a pleasure to help you , how's your gun " debate " going ?
  • AmpersandAmpersand 858 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Thanks for shooting yourself in the foot. next time read what you're C+ping before you post it. You just admitted there are a number of different approaches to defining obesity (e.g. "There are a number of different approaches to measuring obesity") when you were meant to be trying to argue that there was only one and it was BMI.

    Maybe try reading and/or thinking next time?
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Ampersand

    Your claim was fatties = obese you were corrected and now you’re sulking , my definition is correct and destroyed your assertions 

    So so tell me as you’ve yet failed to answer if Fat  = Obese then Skinny = Anorexic as this is what you’re asserting , bet you won’t answer yet again , so the gun debate still not going well for you ?
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @BaconToes

    “ I believe that no human should be killed for circumstances completely out of their control “

    So is it preferable to watch them die slowly from starvation rather than finish  them off ? 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @Fredsnephew ;

    “Why don’t  we humanely feed the people of third world countries “

    I take it you include yourself in the “ we “ so tell me are you feeding them as we speak ? 

  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 151 Pts   -  
    If you have the physical and financial resources to 'humanely kill' the malnourished, then you already have the resources to feed them. 

    Seems counterintuitive. 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @EmeryPearson


    “”If you have the physical and financial resources to 'humanely kill' the malnourished, then you already have the resources to feed them.””

    Yet we don’t do it and we know only a certain amount will be saved so the preferable option seems to be to watch them die slowly instead of quickly 
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 151 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Then have you not answered your own question? If it's not worth feeding them, it's not worth killing them.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @EmeryPearson

    “Then have you not answered your own question? If it's not worth feeding them, it's not worth killing them”

    Where did I say it was not worth feeding them ?  I said we are watching them die slowly from afar so why not finish them off swiftly ? 
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 151 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    If you have the resources to do so, you have the resources to feed them. 

    Makes no sense to expend the same amount of resources killing someone, if those same resources would alleviate why your killing them. It's counter-intuitive. 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @EmeryPearson

    “ Makes no sense to expend the same amount of resources killing someone, if those same resources would alleviate why your killing them. It's counter-intuitive.” 

    Yes , so in the meantime we will do as always watch them die slowly and talk about the need to get resources to them as fast as possible 
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 151 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Then that's the answer to your question. If it's not worth feeding them, it's not worth the expense to kill them either.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @EmeryPearson

    ” Then that's the answer to your question. If it's not worth feeding them, it's not worth the expense to kill them either“

    I didn't say it’s not worth feeding them , I said we cannot feed them so it’s seems preferable to watch them die slowly as we do 
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 151 Pts   -  
    Yet, we CAN feed them, just as we CAN kill them. If it's not worth expending the resources feeding them, it's not worth expending the resources killing them. If your question is of the morality of the situation, genocide is likely worse than inaction.
  • someone234someone234 647 Pts   -  
    @EmeryPearson Dee will cry until you say sorry for debating well. Then he will say you are trolling him 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @someone234

    Just like you’ve begged me 6 times in messages to “ tell Aaron I sent you “ you don’t debate anyway that’s why you were kicked of C D 
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @EmeryPearson

    “Yet, we CAN feed them, just as we CAN kill them. If it's not worth expending the resources feeding them, it's not worth expending the resources killing them. If your question is of the morality of the situation, genocide is likely worse than inaction.”

    Your CAN in block letters is why ? But yet we don’t feed them we watch them die slowly . 

    Of Course it’s worth killing them to alleviate their suffering as we j
    have no intention of feeding them 

  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 151 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Genocide induces suffering as well. If you wish to avoid suffering, genocide isn't an option either, and neither is inaction.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
     @EmeryPearson

    “Genocide induces suffering as well. If you wish to avoid suffering, genocide isn't an option either, and neither is inaction”

    Genocide is the solution to a slow agonising death by inaction regards feeding , cost effective ways could be worked out and the work could take place swiftly and humanely 

  • someone234someone234 647 Pts   -  
    @Dee I still use CD. The admin there is a maniac who wrongly banned me.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch