McDonald's can be harmful.

Before I begin my argument, I just want to ask everyone who is voting in this debate to vote based upon the debater's arguments, and the quality of them, and not on the topic. Please do not vote for sdcharger just because he is debating on one side of a topic that many people like. Please vote based on the quality of our arguments, and if sdcharger wins this debate (which I hope not) please let it be because of the arguments he put forth. Thank You First, I would like to define the topic so there is no confusion as to what we are talking about. McDonald's is a fast food chain of restaurants across the world that serve food like hamburgers and french fries. For more info, go to www.mcdonalds.com/ . Harmful, as defined by Merriam Webster, is: of a kind likely to be damaging:injurious. Now to my rebuttals of sdcharger's previous arguments: He said that McDonald's kills animals for food, and that act is harmful. That is a ridiculous argument! Any act can be harmful if you look at it a certain way. An example: using a computer uses electricity, coal is often used to generate electricity, and the pollution from burning coal is harmful to the ozone layer. Another example: we print newspapers on paper. Paper comes from trees, and chopping them down for paper is harmful to the tree. Do you see what I mean? Anything can be traced beck to something harmful, as long as you look far enough. But, in doing something that was the result of something harmful, we can often get harmless and very helpful resutls! Through McDonald's, we get the Ronald McDonald House Charities. RMHC create programs that help improve the health and well being of children. For more information about Ronald McDonald House Charities, go to www.rmhc.org/ My point here is that just because something may be the product of something harmful, that does not mean that everything that someone does is harmful. Just because McDonald's kills animals for food, that does not mean that McDonald's if harmful. That is like saying that NASA is bad because they are leaving junk is space. But without NASA, we would not know all that we know about space. My opponent's second point: McDonald's is fattening. Yes, a cheeseburger has 6 grams of fat. But, it will only be harmful to you if you do not do anything afterwards. If you excersise the proper amount, a cheeseburger will not have any bad effects on your body or yourself. If you eat and do not excersise afterwards, you WILL gain weight, no matter what you eat! My opponent's third point: McDonald's is a fast food restaurant. Yes, they taste good, but they are not prepared well. Anything prepared quickly is not prepared well. Wait. Is my opponent saying that just because food may be prepared quickly, it is not of a good quality??? That is like saying that becasue a chef cooks food quickly, he is a bad chef. What about the Iron Chef?? They are given a very short amount of time to create an amazing meal? Does that mean that their foods are horrible? Also, my opponent said that "The ingredients are not always fresh because they need to prepare the food in advance to serve the multitude of customers." How is this harmful? I would like to ask my opponent to clarify this. Now to my arguement that McDonald's is not harmful. Ronald McDonald House Charities. McDonald's directly gives support by paying the general and administrative costs of the RMHC global office. That means that almost all the money donated to RMHC goes to their programs to help childrens. This argument alone should win me this debate. My basic argument is basicaly that McDonald's giving RMHC support and help shows that McDonald's is not harmful. I will give this argument first, and save them for later. Thank you, and please do not vote based upon your opinion, only upon the arguments in this debate.