A debate.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Alright gentleman. As noted under initial parameters of this debate, neither of us is to rebut what the other said during the final round. Thus, I shall tell you why I won based on the 3 debate rounds I engaged my opponent. Closing statements: I believe that my opponent and I have exhausted all avenues of the subject at hand. I maintain my position that "DDR ought to be implemented in schools that can afford it" is correct and that my opponent has failed to demonstrate how his position overcomes the following problems: #1. PRO's case suffered from the fact that he'd essentially be condoning the sports which we had agreed as being more "dangerous" than DDR. He cannot accept the other sports (as he has done in the round) AND make the argument that DDR should not be played in schools due to the overall lack of safety.. In addition, PRO's arguments on Step aerobics being a safer version of DDR hold no water as PRO not only had to bring up other activities to counter the benefits I said applied to DDR, but I also pointed out the vast differences between the two activities. Finally, PRO failed to prove that DDR was even dangerous. He tried citing a source that would suggest that players can get serious eye problems, but wasn't aware that the source suggested that users would have to be watching a screen non stop for SEVERAL HOURS (most unlike a HS/MS P.E. Course, especially given that many students would have to take turns). I had also pointed out that the P.E. teacher could simply see to it that students were not playing for too long (something which PRO doesn't address). #2. Regardless of whether or not you buy my arguments that DDR would not cause anorexia, the fact of the matter is that PRO made this claim and was thus burdened to prove it. His source couldn't confirm this and he never provided a single shred of evidence to back up this claim, thus there is really no reason for you to consider it. #3. PRO conceded that obesity was a serious problem that needed to be dealt with, yet couldn't provide a single compelling reason as to why "a system which he empirically showed was effective in dealing with obesity" is inferior to a system which "he could not muster even a shred of evidence for in order to prove that it is just as (or more) effective in dealing with obesity." #4. PRO provided a bunch of individual activities that could measure of the benefits I have shown come from ONE activity. As I have pointed out, this not only advocates inefficiency, but it also does nothing to establish that step aerobics is superior. Why should one have join the band, learn the Cha Cha slide, practice wii sport, and do step aerobics, when they can simply go to their P.E. class and get all of my benefits simply through merely playing DDR. PRO's case never imagined to overcome this. #5. I've contested that interest and motivation produce better results, yet as I've pointed out, PRO gives us no reason to believe that schools shouldn't pursue better results (mental and physical education). Now there were other points made in this debate, but these are the most important and are what you should consider when you determine your vote. Thus, I implore you to vote for my stance. I thank my opponent for the debate and the audience for reading. Take care. :D