Fast food restaurants should have narrow doorways to stop the obese from getting in.

Sumo wrestlers are elevated to near godlike status for what they do - they are used to being treated with the utmost respect. They're also really, really big and if you attempted to explain to them that they had to walk around to some lowly service entrance, they probably could eat you instead. In fact, and as you have already noted, the very existence of another entrance defeats the point, as an enterprising fat person could, with very little effort, simply walk around and find it. He is unlikely to hike all the way to another restaurant when the distance to the door by the bins is far shorter (and the skip might offer the possibility of free hor d'eourves for the less discerning fatman.) Furthermore, there are problems in your solution to the problem of fat men getting stuck in the doors: Chains like McDonald's have recently spent millions of pounds in an attempt to change their reputation away from cheap, trashy fast food stereotypes towards a more healthy, fresh and organic image. Imagine their horror, should they be informed that it will now be necessary, twice a week or more, to slosh chicken fat over their doorway by the bucketful. There is the issue of marketing: how many people will choose a restaurant that has grease all over the floor? There is the issue of legality: when the next patron slips on this grease and ends up in hospital, who is culpable? The fat man or the restaurant? There is also an inherent danger to the situation. Picture the scenario - a fat man stands helplessly squashed into the doorframe. Behind him are three or four of his wheezing fat friends, standing in queue and waiting to get in. Our first fatty is then popped out by the battering ram (pun intended?) He of course travels straight backwards, transferring his considerable momentum to the man directly behind him. In a sequence similar to Newton's Cradle, this momentum is transfered down the queue, one fat man at a time, until the man at the end is sent hurtling backwards like a very blubbery cannonball. No one wants to walk down a street where such obese projectiles are liable to appear at random. My opponent scoffs at the notion of the obese taking to the streets in protest, but I urge him to think more carefully. I believe there was talk some time ago in some journals of the discovery that the consumption of greasy food acts like an addiction - people who lived off a diet of fast food and then were made to change to salads went through stages of craving and withdrawal. The conclusion was, the more we eat fast food, the more we want fast food, and the more we eat fruit instead, the more we find we like eating fruit instead. So definitely yes - fat people under the spell of a greasy addiction, when faced with the prospect of being cut off from the substance of that addiction, most certainly will be moved to revolt. Laziness is not a prohibitive factor - consider: we have already, by dint of the situation, eliminated those tubbies too lazy to leave their houses. Yes, we are dealing with the kind of people who will avoid walking if at all possible, but they are nevertheless the kind of people who will do so if they absolutely feel compelled - for example, if they are hungry and there's a McDonald's nearby. We can expect to see the ravenous obese chomping their way across the streets - pickets in one hand, burgers in the other, some halfheartedly groaning attempts at slogans, some menacing passers-by with their unpleasant smell, the more aggressive of them barging over telephone boxes and sitting on policemen. Yes, this is the future that my opponent's suggested actions will bring us to, and it is to avert this fate that I urge all those reading to vote with me against the proposal.