It's time to restrict the supply of junk food to the obese

Honorable brian_eggleston, Dear Voters, As my honorable opponent suggested, we should "prevent the obese from obtaining junk food from restaurant chains such as McDonald's, KFC and Burger King." I am against this. I will ignore the fallacy in the argument for which it is unclear which restaurant chains my opponent is referring to. In the sake of debate I will assume that my opponent means "Fast-Food" franchises which offer and promote unhealthy eating. While I strongly agree that obesity is a large problem within society, I do not believe that the means suggested to combat the problem are either ethically or constitutionally correct. Encouraging obese people, or in fact any people to run, jump and dodge obstacles for their food is ridiculous (let alone dangerous) and can lead to humiliation to the highest degree. My opponent is thus suggesting using humiliation to discourage eating fast food, or in other words, discouraging the belief that fast food is unhealthy and not of the right nutritional value. This can be compared to when Jewish people in Nazi Germany had to wear David's Star [1] on their clothing on the streets and in school to humiliate them, and through this humiliation aiming to convert them to more 'appropriate' beliefs as they should be ashamed of their choice of belief. [2] My opponent's claim can thus be worded as 'cruel' and ethically wrong. It is true that the customers could choose to eat at a fast food restaurant (and therefore have a choice to be humiliated or not), whereas Jews had no choice but to be branded with the so-called Yellow Star. However, just like the customers would have a choice to eat elsewhere, the Jews also had a choice to live elsewhere. [3] The treatment of the customer would also go against the fundamental base upon which the United States are based on: Its constitution. Amendment 14, Clause 1 reads, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." My opponent's suggested law goes against almost every aspect of this amendment. Enforcing a legislation forcing customers to run for their food, assuming that the more obese people will not be able to catch their food is a law deprives them of life, liberty and property as firstly, they will not be able to choose to live their life as they like, and have the liberty to act as they choose because they will be forced to either not eat fast food, or run. As the customer has paid for his/her meal, the law will also assume that the more obese people will be deprived of their property. The more obese people which my opponent hopes this legislation will refer to will not be treated equally. The proposed legislation thus goes against almost everything the first clause of Amendment 14 reads. Furthermore, it is almost as if the more obese people are being punished for being obese by not being allowed to eat. This goes against Amendment 8 of the constitution which claims "cruel and unusual punishment [should not be] inflicted." [4] We can look for other countries. The 68th Article of the Icelandic constitution says, "No one may be subjected to torture or any other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment," and "No one shall be required to perform compulsory labour." [5] The Indian Constitution reads, "Protection of life and personal liberty.- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." (Article 21) Article 13 of the same constitution reads, "Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights. ... (Clause 2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void." [6] We can thus see that freedom of life and liberty is supported internationally and is in fact Article 3 of the United Nations' Declaration of Human Rights.[7] Lastly, after the government will have stratified companies which run 'Fast Food' restaurants and made it mandatory for them to have a conveyor belt in each of its franchises, it would be unfair towards 'Fast-Food' companies as they are being treated differently than their competitors. In replacement to the policy my opponent has suggested, more emphasis should be placed on education. As Plato said in 'The Republic', "The beginning is the most important part of the work." [8] Therefore, if we teach our children of the implications of fast food from the very beginning, they will become more aware of the potential consequences. Grants could even be offered to those which produce movies or other media campaigns with positive social implications such as the movie 'SuperSize Me' which would aim for awareness of the older generations. It is not up to the government to control its population as shown in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, but it can certainly educate its population to make certain decisions. Let us say this legislation passes, and fast food restaurants will implement this policy of a conveyor belt. Hypothetically, customer A has two friends accompanying him, the two friends can simply pick up the food as it comes out of the kitchen, so no "chasing" will be involved. Let us assume another case, an obese family of 6 has a very athletic aunt/uncle/any other family member or friend. What should stop the family to send the athlete to order the food? This undermines the attempt to combat obesity. Lastly, what will stop other customers who are also hungry not to wait at the end of the track and take food which does not belong to them? In conclusion, we can see that not only is the argument ethically, and constitutionally wrong, but also an incomplete method to combat obesity. Sources: [1] Image (http://parenting.leehansen.com...) [2] Jewish History (http://www.geschichteinchronologie.ch...) [3] US Holocaust Memorial Museum (http://www.ushmm.org...) [4] US constitution (http://www.usconstitution.net...) [5] Icelandic Constitution (http://www.government.is...) [6] Indian Constitution (http://indiacode.nic.in...) [7] UN Human Rights (http://www.un.org...) [8] Plato Quotation (The Republic <http://www.amazon.com...'s+Republic&x=0&y=0> ; http://www.memorable-quotes.com...)