Alright, so two people can touch eachother, and Al Gore isn't a terrorist. But I refuse to stop arguing with people that are smarter than me until I can win.
This was inspired by an episode of the television show, The Moment of Truth. A paramedic was asked if fat people repulsed him, his answer was yes. This led me to question whether fat people repulsed me, my conclusion is for myself only but it has led me to more questions, mainly, are the obese immoral?
I am sure everyone can say, that they believe that allowing another person to starve to death, specifically children, is immoral, or, not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics.
A normal adult consumes 2427 calories a day, 18% less than an obese adult.
Since a baby needs 100 calories a day, every second day an obese person is effectively responsible for the death of a baby in a third world country. That is 182 babies every year. People are given the death penalty, for many less than that.
There are still some obese people, but you are right not very many. And when it comes to unconsumed food turning into waste, it doesnt HAVE to. I am not taling about the half eaten hamburgers, and cookies with one bite out of them. I am talking about the actual entire boxes of cereal eaten that the body didn't need. If these were compiled and given to the starving would we not save many a life?
Absolutely true. But the companies that sell the food are responsible for sending that food to third-world countries, not the people that eat it.
I beleive the obesity of young children could be immoral of the parrents. If children don't eat healthy then the parrents deserve the blame. Though sometimes there are cases in which children can't help there weight, despite their parent's attempt to feed them healthy food.
Parental education is key for this and for a number of other issues, so I'd like to highlight that.
yes but if gluttony is a sin and you would condemn it as being immoral you have to condemn any1 else who is guilty of any of the other 7 sins.
1. Lust. Who can honestly say they have never thought about anyone in a sexual way?
2. Gluttony the sin in question. As we have mentioned there are many people who fall into this category.
3.Greed. Making wealth your top priority. In todays materialistic world money is everything to lots of people.
4.Sloth. The meaning of this has changed through time but who can honestly say they have never been lazy.
5.Wrath. Who can honestly say they have never lost their temper.
6.Envy. Who can honestly say theu have never felt a little bit jealous of someone.
7.Pride. Who can say tey have never been a little vain or arrogant in their entire lives.
As lots of people are making gluttony the basis of their argument who are they to judge people. I will say that i have done all of these things before and that i am not perfect. Nobody is. Also the 7 sins are rooted in religion, as they were invented in the middle ages by the catholic church. Why should all 21st century people live by these laws. You are accusing them of gluttony which is fair enough but to back it up by saying they should not do it because its one of the sins seems strange as they are religious laws not applicable to everyone and i doubt all obese people are followers of these beliefs.
I do find it fun to stir up controversy and discussion with general statements
But I guess we can move away from that now. When it comes to obesity in children, I believe the parent, or a relative, is often the fault. This makes me think about The Maury Show, and how he brings up parents whos five year old children weigh 230 pounds. Sometimes even the Aunts and Uncles are going around the parent and giving these children entire pizzas and containers of ice cream.
Then theres the strain the obese put on the health care system. In Canada we have public health care, does an individual have any ethical responsibility not to be a burden on others?
Yes but that is a flaw in 21st century Western Society. I mean we say people can do what they want but then complain when we dont like people doing something we dont agree with.
this is a very strange and almost pointless arguement to me.Everyones arguing over whether its wrong for someone to be fat.Let me just say this, if your obese then its your own fault, and you will be punished by the overshock of health problems that will become of it.Whether obesity is immoral or not it doesn't really matter.The problem is getting this huge obesity rate to shrink.The problem isn't that people are are eating too much and becoming fat.It's the fact that everything that tastes good is very fatning. I'm sure you've all heard this before, but its true, or atleast its true in my eyes.
In Canada we have public health care, does an individual have any ethical responsibility not to be a burden on others?
In a nutshell, when it comes to morbidity, the prevalent perspective on healthcare is that it is not an individual's fault that they are ill but they are obliged to seek treatment.
This comes in quite nicely with crimsonblade55's outlook of removing morality as an externality and talk about it incidental to the practical meat of the matter (something that I support wholly on a personal and professional level).
Of course, even in most cases the lack of treatment seeking is not willful, affected by a lack of information and support. These things are instrumental in empowering one to fulfill this alleged duty.
The problem isn't that people are are eating too much and becoming fat.It's the fact that everything that tastes good is very fatning.
Also correct. Eating fatty foods (being the most energy rich) used to be a rare occurrence so we're naturally driven to desiring this the most. But those in the first world haven't learnt particularly well to adapt to conditions of plenty: still driven by these base instincts without being aware of them, it is little wonder that the "bigger is better" and lard-piling habits of the west have gone unchecked for so long.
In stating anything broadly, there is going to be people who are, and people who aren't. Asuming the whole of any group as one thing is wrong, because it will never apply to all. That said, many people base on what they see. Here's an example. Now say you're talking about someone mildly overweight. Now, are you going to automatically think, "They must eat a lot." or are you going to consider the fact that maybe, just maybe, there have been weight issues that run in the family? Other than that, if someone is obese, does not mean they don't care at all about starving countries, etc., etc. It could just simply mean, they might not think about what they eat, or otherwise. Assuming anything of any group is not going to solve anything, just cause issues and argments.
If you are obese it is your own fault, and you will suffer the cosnequences. But hiw many other people do you affect? Be it the cost of your treatment, or the food you're eating that others need.
And I never thought about that, everythign that does taste good IS calorie-laden.
@ ricki24
We are not arguing over wjether it is wrong to be overweight, just obese. But obesity almost always involves excess eating. But should they think about what they eat, knwoing others dont have that food to eat? And I dont THINK we're making an assumption. As we are discussing the point in question.
@ Strop
So are you basically saying it is a self-control issue?
is wrong to be overweight, just obese. But obesity almost always involves excess eating
Both involve overgeneralisations xD
The distinction between 'overweight' and 'obese' is an arbitrary value in your Body Mass Index, which is only a loose indicator of one's health. There may be an association between consumption and obesity therefore, but care must be taken.
Furthermore, weight gain is strictly expressed in terms of energy in versus energy out. The 'self-control' issues (if you must simplify it down to that, though this is a bit much as everything can become an 'issue of self-control'. There are also the issues that affect energy out (metabolic) as we've mentioned earlier. So 'excess eating' is not as appropriate a term as one may initially think!
Strop is right that other factors come into weight gain and how BMI can be misinterpereted. For example Johnny Wilkinson the rugby player is classed as obese. You wouldnt think so to look at him but he has lots of mucle which is actually heavier than fat. Just an example.
However i disagree with strop about the over eating thing. Once someone gets to a stage where they are medically classed as obese i dont think having a slow metabolism is really an excuse. They have to be eating too much otherwise they wouldnt be classed as such. I see the point you are trying to make about it hto. I would say that they eat too much and so are very unfit and dont excercise enough so they dont burn off any energy. I think obese people are a combination of the two in most cases as just being one would probably make you overweight not obese.
There are also the issues that affect energy out (metabolic) as we've mentioned earlier.
true but if your metabolism is slow, than you need less energy input than a person of same weight, smae amount of muscle etc. needs. in the end it comes down to the equasion you posted.
energy in vs. energy out.
if you eat more than you need, you become overweight or obese. which can be determined not only by the simple and vague bmi but also using more precise methods, like bodyfat scales and such.
so no it is not natures fault, when people become fat it is lack of exercise and a wrong diet.
and there is no excuse for blaming it on the metabolism especially not if you look at the people concerned. there is not a chance, that all these people eat right and exercise.
