Childhood Obesity Essay Example for Free

Childhood Obesity Essay Pro: My opinion is that parents should be blamed for their childs obesity, whether it be partially or fully, they do influence their childs weight. The parents of children are the ones who provide food for them, so they have direct control of what their child is consuming, so they should be able to help their child maintain a healthy weight. Parents also have control over what their children do, resulting in the fact that parents could enroll their child in an excersize program or at least stop them from sitting around inside all day. This debate is not focused on those who gain weight due to disease; it is focusing on children becoming obese due to food consumption. Con: I really disagree that parents should be blamed for their childs obesity. Its not like the parents are shoving the food down their childs throats. Kids are soley responsible for what they consume. Kids dont just eat at home. They can eat at school, with their friends at McDonalds, ect. So childrens parents arent the main influences in what thier children eat. Pro: Its not like the parents are shoving the food down their childs throats The parents are, however, buying the majority of food that their children eat. Kids are soley responsible for what they consume. Their parents are the ones who buy the food that is available at home, so how could the children be soley responsibe? They can eat at school The majority of schools have supplied healthy foods for students due to rapidly increasing rates of obesity; also, have you considered the many students who bring food from home? Con: Yes some schools do supply healthy food choices but that is only as far as i know for 1/3 of the schools population. And have you considered that schools have alternatives to just a tray lunch such as, as its referred to at my school Ale Cart. Which includes fries, burgers, nachos, everything you can find on the McDonalds Menu. So the parents buy what the kids eat at home but parents do pay attention to what they do buy their kids for food. not every parent buys their kids Fruit by the Foot, Tootsie Pops, and all that other junk that causes childhood obesity. So the parents can and do enforce healthy eating habits!!!!!!!!! Pro: not every parent buys their kids Fruit by the Foot, Tootsie Pops, and all that other junk that causes childhood obesity. Then again, not every child is obese. The parents who carelessly buy fattening foods and leave it in the house already influence what their children will eat, because why choose to eat vegetables when junk food is lying there? Children do not understand this, and therefore will eat the food that is bought by their parents. The majority of children do not eat their food outside of home except for at school, and at school, I know that many countries are opting for a change in food, and this will probably happen. Also, once again, parents could urge their children to excersize or play outside instead of sitting around all day Con: Okay many countries are opting for healthy food but that hasnt happened yet so as of now its not there. And how can parents urge their kids to play outside or whatever when their busy buying food thats not good for their kids as you previously stated!!!! And I know you said we arent debating with diseases and stuff but it is an inevitable fact that obesity is in the gene pool. So like its already in the genes and the parent has no controll over that. So how is it the parents fault?!?!?!?!? And this is off the subject but do you have any idea where i can find decent Values and Value Criterion for school debate cases!?!?!?!?! And how can kids play outside when they have homework!?!?!?!?! Where I go to school there is alot to be tackled; like the debate case I have to have done by 4th period tommorow for instance. Pro: And I know you said we arent debating with diseases and stuff Then why bring it up? I clearly stated in my opening statement that we are not debating about diseases and such, but food consumption. Therefore, for everything mentioned about diseases, I will call it out as invalid. And how can kids play outside when they have homework!?!?!?!?! How do people do extra curricular activites? Homework, on average, takes up thirty minutes to two hours for an elementary school, and perhaps one hour to two hours for gifted. Most schools release children from school around 3:00. This leaves them with four hours at the LEAST with the maximum amount of homework. And how can parents urge their kids to play outside or whatever when their busy buying food thats not good for their kids as you previously stated!!!! Parents do not spend their lives in grocery stores; they could at least mention excersize OR allow them to do extracurricular activities after school. However, when parents notice that their child is obese, they should at least try to change their lifestyle a bit, because a familys lifestyle really does make a difference for a childs weight. Who directs the familys way of life? The parents. Where I go to school there is alot to be tackled Based on your profile, it says that you are in highschool. Highschool is VERY different than elementary school in the amount of work and such people get. Parents are at fault for their childs obesity because they buy the food. They are in charge of what their children do, and they lead the lifestyle of their children. Children need excerize and healthy food. Parents are responsible for both areas. Lack of these things will cause obesity. Parents have control over this, and can stop it. Childrens schools are not guilty, because the majority are changing their menu to stop the rapid growth rate of obesity. Fast food places do hold a bit of the blame, but like my opponent has said before, its not like theyre shoving food down the kids throats. My opponent has failed to prove any clear points as to why parents should NOT be blamed for obesity; he has only provided counter-arguments. Hopefully he will state many points in the final round.

European Imperialism :: essays research papers

By the 1900's, Europe was already underway with its imperialistic conquests abroad. Colonies were forcefully taken and undeveloped nations were carved apart by so-called "racial crusaders", who were on a mission to civilize the barbaric. Along with expansion, however, came abuses from the invading powers. These flaws in European dominance can easily be noted, especially when examining Africa and Asia; the consequences, in some cases, being death by the thousands. Therefore, due to these and other severe actions during their domination of the world, Europeans should be condemned for their abuses of power. The first nation which will be discussed is China, from the continent of Asia. The British had their eyes on China, ever since the restricted population of merchants in Gwangzhou traded with the local monopoly of businesses. England had two major reasons for their interest: first, Chinese silver was desired by the empire because of its high value. Second, Britain had a sur plus of Opium, a drug grown in India, and it needed vast numbers of people to purchase it. China traded peacefully although reluctantly with Britain, until the government noticed the negative effects of the drug on its people. The opium trade was then outlawed promptly by the Chinese government. The substance, however, was still smuggled into the country. The Chinese government confronted the British regarding the smuggling and this sparked the Opium War (1899-1902). Britain pummeled the inferior naval force and won the altercation. Now, Britain was not only free to corrupt the Chinese people with their opium, but they added a colony to their empire: the large, rich port city of Hong Kong. This abuse of the people for their own personal gain is a clear demonstration of one of the many flaws in European dominance. The second nation which will be discussed is Sudan, from the continent of Africa. Sudan was not a military, economic, or political threat to Britain. It was blocking, howev er, British domination of Africa and preventing the gain of more political power for the empire. Therefore, it had to be conquered. The Sudanese population was largely Muslim and resisted English rule. It wanted to be governed by people of the ethnic majority and would fight to the death to "rid the world of evil"(Ahmad*). At first, the rebels were successful. Later, the British incorporated into the war a weapon of mass destruction: the machine gun.

Ethical Egoism & Psychological Egoism Essay

Ethical egoism which simply known as egoism, is of normative & rigid nature which states that a person should do whatever he/she likes and whatever which is in their interest. It also states that a person performing any act other than influence of one own interest does not come under egoism. Robert Olson in his book – ‘The morality of self-interest’ (1965) stated a theory that one should do whatever that promotes or supports one’s self interest, if everyone starts doing it, then it will collectively promote their personal interest. There are three diverse forms of ethical egoism which are individual, personal and universal. Individual ethical egoism states that all people should do what is in their best interest. Personal ethical egoism states that one should do whatever is in one’s best interest but can’t compel anyone what they should do. Universal ethical egoism discuss that everyone should do what is in their best interest. Psychological egoism Psychological egoism is a descriptive type of theory. This theory states that all actions of individuals are aggravated by their personal interest even if it seems to be act of benignant. People only act to attain their own interests intentionally or unintentional, directly or indirectly. It also states that whatever people do or act they mostly intend to do that, while doing it they might act selfishly. An objection regarding psychological theory was stated by William Hazlitt and Thomas Macaulay (1991) that â€Å"If a person willingly performs an act, that means he derives personal enjoyment from it; therefore, people only perform acts that give them personal enjoyment. † This statement concludes that a person will only perform those acts which fulfill their self interest, satisfaction or pleasure. Fallacy in Psychological Egoism The major fallacy in Psychological egoism is hasty generalization Humans are often known to work or act for the welfare of others like donating in charity, doing volunteer work, such acts are not visibly benefitting the one who is doing it. Therefore, it rejects the thought that this theory is applicable under all circumstances, that humans only do what benefits them. In another case people might do such acts which will ultimately harm them like smoking, drug addiction or suicide, conscience are also a factor that influence one’s action. If one considers all acts that harm or act of conscience then no action remains that’s not a form of psychological egoism. Strong and Weak Versions of Ethical Egoism According to strong ethical egoism it is always right to intend one’s own self interest, and not at all right not to do so. Weak ethical egoism states that it is always right to intend one’s own self interest, but it is inevitably never right not to do such a thing. Therefore, basically if one does something that’s for its own greatest good like attaining success it can be applied on both types of egoism that’s strong and weak egoism. But if one acts in a way that is not necessarily in his/ or her greatest benefit for instance doing a volunteer work in a hospital or a disaster struck area, then there are certainly more lucrative ways by which one can effectively use his time although they might not be as morally positive. In such a case weak ethical egoism supports and shows flexibility in this regard. Contrast of Doctrine of Theories For ethical egoist the motivation is personal pleasure, your personal benefit can be monetary or otherwise, survival or existence, personal achievement, fame and all those consequences that one visualizes to be fulfilling his personal needs of all kind. If not properly understood ethical egoism promotes greediness & selfishness amongst people where your sole intention/ motivation is your own personal interest. For Psychological egoist the motivation can be anything other people’s benefit that is satisfying your sense of responsibility, your pleasure arising by fulfilling your moral obligation, your intrinsic happiness arising out of your hard work, your duty or your volunteer act of helping others. Although also in the psychological theory the end product is the personal benefit but ethically it seems productive than ethical egoism which is highly inclined toward misinterpretation.

Writing News Shakespeares Works Are to Be Novelized

Hogarth Fiction subdivision of Random House is going to do publish novelization of famous Shakespeare’s plays, and has already enlisted a number of popular modern authors to do this job. However, it isn’t going to happen for quite some time – the publisher’s intention is to publish the books internationally in 2016, timing this event to coincide with the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare’s passing. The authors hired for this extraordinary task are Howard Jacobson, Jeanette Winterson, Margaret Atwood and Anne Tyler, each is supposed to write one novel (at least, at the time being). The first two to be published will be Taming of the Shrew by Anne Tyler and The Winter’s Tale by Jeanette Winterson. It hardly comes as news to the authors assigned to the task that they are doing something extremely unusual if not audacious, but they have a saving grace of understanding that they are hardly capable of adding anything to Shakespeare. According to Jeanette Winterson, she perceives this work as a possibility to form another kind of relationship with the text she considered to be a kind of talisman for her for many years. In the course of her literary career she worked with The Winter’s Tale under many disguises and sees it as an interesting opportunity to work with it directly, for once. The next two novelizations to come are The Tempest by Margaret Atwood and Merchant of Venice by Man Booker Prize-winner Howard Jacobson. It seems that the authors have been chosen in accordance with their personal attitudes towards different Shakespeare’s works – Atwood, for example, states that the play she is going to work on has always been a favorite of hers, and it would be interesting to show her own interpretation of this work. However, by this moment the novelizations are limited to romances and comedies. Nevertheless, Clara Farmer, the publishing director of Hogarth Shakespeare, says that this limitation will probably not stick – they are planning to novelize all the canonic Shakespeare’s work, but for the time being they don’t know anybody who would be up to the task of dealing with the tragedies. The authors chosen for this peculiar task seem to be fascinated by the idea – after all, it doesn’t simply mean working in co-authorship with one of the most famous writers of all time, but also the challenge of expressing the four hundred year old notions in a modern world.