Happy Tree Friends is a good influence on children.

In 1997, Aubrey Ankrum, Rhode Montijo and Kenn Navarro produced a short cartoon for a fledgling company known as Mondo Mini Shows. The cartoon was very simple: it featured an enraged blue dinosaur killing three woodland creatures with his banjo. Despite the cartoon's simplicity, it gained popularity and initiated a landslide, a controversial internet sensation and television show known as Happy Tree Friends. [1] I, as the con, and the initiator of this debate, would like to establish the motion as "Happy Tree Friends is a good influence on children", with children meaning children, people of youth, youth meaning the early period of existence, growth, or development. [2] Sure, the Christian Bible states that "we are all children of the same universe", but individual words can be and are used liberally; therefore, such words need not be taken literally, word for word. Even if one were to take such a word literally, "child" has multiple meanings — "a son or daughter of human parents", for example — according to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. The "children"s in Galations 3:26 and the motion are not necessarily the same. Now that I've that out of the way, I'd like to move on to my main speech. I have two topics to emphasize: role models and desensitization. I'll begin with role models. Children see Happy Tree Friends characters as role models, not as characters that children learn from the mistakes of, as my opponent stated. Children generally like cute, cuddly characters. This is depicted by such characters as those in Tellytubbies, Barney, and Sesame Street, to name a few. Children, having warmed up to similarly-looking characters, will follow the actions of the animals in Happy Tree Friends. This includes injuring others intentionally [3]. While it's not likely that children will act so extremely, such hostile, violent behavior will still be embedded in children's minds. Does that sound like a good influence? Moving on to desensitization. During early childhood, children are often taught not to harm others. Because of this, children view physical harm as horrifying. Happy Tree Friends, with its gratuitous depictions of physical harm, helps to relieve children of this fear. One could say that Happy Tree Friends, over time, could make violence second nature to children. That's not a good influence. My opponent stated that the cartoon brings about laughter, and that laughter is healthy. Think of fast food. Many people like fast food. So, fast food makes such people happier, in turn making them healthier. But, wait! Fast food isn't known to make people healthier! Hmm, what's wrong? Sure, there are short-term, surface benefits, but the long-term effects are not good. Children will lose their fear, their barrier to violence, thanks to Happy Tree Friends. Happy Tree Friends is shaping children's minds for violence. Regardless if they commit violent acts or not, the notion and the ease toward violence will be embedded in their minds. If you want violent children powering our future, please vote for the proposition of the motion, but if you want children who avoid violence to run the world peacefully, please vote for the con. Thank you audience, thank you person-with-the-initials-AA, and thank you, opponent, and have a good night. [1] Happy Tree Friends Wiki - http://happytreefriends.wikia.com... [2] Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary [3] "Party Animal - Part 2" - http://youtube.com...