args

School Uniforms Shouldn't Be Required

I thank 9spaceking for his response. 1. I thank you for conceding so graciously, I admire you for doing so. I do however remind the voters that this was one major argument presented by 9spaceking and therefore since he has conceded it, the voters should give me extra points. 2. I believe you are making a mistake here, your argument is unsupported greatly. Firstly the testimony of a parent is hardly evidence. Also let us understand that we should not live on extremes, the Uniform only gives a sense of conformity it does not automatically make a person into a robot, to insinuate such is wrong. My opponent actually concedes to the fact that it does create unity, his only argument is that it creates too much unity to the point where everyone becomes robotic. I think I tackled this when I talked about how living on such extremes is incorrect. In any case let us not forget that these children have individual personalities, and wear their own accessories, and wear what they want at home. This way the children get a place where they may express themselves, and they get a sense of conformity from their School. I believed I also talked about how many children take pride in their uniforms. If a student studies in St. Marks one of the best private schools in America they would do so quite pridefully. It so is that 9spaceking's argument does not stand. 3. The link still does not work. In any case the link is useless so long as its argumentation is not summarized. While you may have presented a link as a supporting argument of proof, you need to mention that proof and give a summary. As you have failed to do so in the first rounds, I cannot but ask the voters to disregard this link. 4. My opponent concedes the point that uniforms do help in discipline, taking the analogy works because it shows that uniforms do at the end give children discipline. Is 9spaceking trying to avow that students do not need discipline? 5. I want to begin by saying that source 9 of round 1 does not exist. Secondly I want to assert that it will make a difference to more than 160,000 students as shown in my earlier sources. I think this is a sizeable number, we dtop bullying every way we can, it seems my opponent has conceded this. 6. Firstly lets understand that 9spaceking admits his own numbers in Round 1 were flawed. Now we need to realize that clothes in such poor families are often shared, if a child grows up his clothes are given to the younger siblings. Also the contentions work for ordinary clothes as well. Seeing how by his statistic the clothes are only twice the amount of one month of ordinary clothes the family can save up and in the summer. Ordinary clothes get ripped as well. 9spaceking's stats were way off, an average American spend 2,000 dollars on clothes per year. This compared to 160$$ is such that 160$$ always wins. Also since schools are the major place for which clothes are bought this amount drops to 800$, even if you add the 160$ this makes 960$ per year which is still 1040$ less than what an average American would spend on normal clothes. Another source says students have to spend nearly 250$ a month on clothes for school alone (this 72$ figure is way off), and this puts unnecessary pressure especially on girls. Then there is this third source which claims that this mom has to spend a whooping 1400 pounds for her children's clothes to school. This makes an average of 221$ per month. So the 72$ stat is way off, the comparison is between 72$ per month and 14$ per month, I think the voters can realize what is cheaper. [1]http://money.howstuffworks.com... [2]http://inhabitat.com... [3]http://slummysinglemummy.com... 7. Here my opponent shows that he agrees with me on principle, just not on practice. By giving an argument on how the practice is difficult to enforce he shows he does not have any arguments against the principle. As this debate uses the word 'should' it is a debate of principle as this point becomes moot. In any case while this may be in America, many schools around the world use uniforms and students conform to them. It is after all not that difficult to enforce. Also I have already spoken about how it is not so severe that students will get tattoos just because they are asked to wear uniform, no one in my school has yet done such a thing to the best of my knowledge. Also students are allowed to wear bangles or earring or watches which allow them to express themselves. The personality also matters and it grows, also since students can wear ordinary clothes at home this problem only appears to be one, and does not stand. 8. These girls seem: a. hot, b. comfortable. Most uniforms are comfortable and by the list my opponent has shown there is a slight selection on whether to wear t-shirts, shirts, or sweatshirts. So this point also does not stand. I thank my opponent once more, he has been most gracious! The resolution however collapses. Ajab

School Uniforms

First of all, thank you stew95 for accepting my debate. You said, "if you were to go to school without a uniform then anyone could easily walk in a do anything!" However, I disagree with the exclusiveness of this applying to only schools without unifroms. Anyone with enough money for a school uniform could go buy one, then walk in. The same thing happens in Boy Scouts. Last summer, when we went to Scout Camp, they made us check in for wristbands, as well as wear the uniform, so they knew A) we were scouts, and B) we had checked into a campsite that was reserved. So obviously, the unifrom doesn't actually prove you are a student. A student I.D. would be more effective. For your second argument, "i mean it would also cause alot of groups/gangs because you could tell who is gothic, neddy, ect..." I believe you meant that it would NOT cause the gangs/groups you mentioned. i disagree, for the following reason: if you want to do something, and you are prohibited, will you not try to find a loophole to try and get around that hole? If a gang wants to make itself seperate, they will give themself a different marker than baggy jeans, like bracelets, necklaces, rings, etc. A point I would like to bring up is that of actual education. You may not think that a school uniform can interfere with an education, but consider this: in America,there are an average of 180 school days a year (according to http://ask.yahoo.com...), if you spend even only 20 minutes inspecting a class of thirty students to make sure their uniforms are all being worn correctly, assuming it takes about forty seconds per student, then you have wasted, on average, 2 hours per class the students are inspected in. Now some schools may only do the aforementioned inspection during the first class. Others may do it for all eight periods, adding up to 16 hours. People already complain that education money is being wasted, what will they say when so much time is being wasted on inspection. It doesn't contribute to your education in the slightest. I await my opponents next argument.

School Uniforms Shouldn't Be Required

I thank 9spaceking for his response and for instigating this excellent debate. I should like to remind all that since 9spaceking instigated this debate he chose the resolution and the Proposition position himself. As such I did not force him into accepting the BoP, he put the BoP on himself. I once more cite the Latin rule: "Onus probandi incumbet ei qui deciet, non ei qui negat." With that in the clear, let us now begin! 1. My opponent has conceded this. 2. My opponent has conceded this. 3. He did not summarize what negative impacts and why these negative impacts occured. If his argument bases itself solely on the expression argument he has himself conceded it earlier and therefore this point becomes moot. Also I have tried many times, the page fails to display. 4. He makes a positive claim, which seems quite trollish. In essence discipline is needed because schools help to prepare children for the future, where they will have to follow a set of laws, such as that of a country. A school teaches them all this. Also by raising this point 9spaceking concedes that If his argument bases itself solely on the expression argument he has himself conceded it earlier and therefore this point becomes moot. Also I have tried many times, the page fails to display. 4. He makes a positive claim, which seems quite trollish. In essence discipline is needed because schools help to prepare children for the future, where they will have to follow a set of laws, such as that of a country. A school teaches them all this. Also by raising this point 9spaceking concedes that uniforms help in discipline. 5. I do not have access to source 3, also it is a purely American source and American law cannot be applied to other countries. 6. My opponent has conceded this. 7. My opponent has conceded this. 8(a). Let me start by clarifying that according to the rules you placed the BoP on yourself, whether it put the odds in my favour or not is irrelevant. 8(b). I think I will argue with pictures later. First of all you have the burden to prove that such an evil scientist lives. You also have the burden to show that these children will be made into robots. Also there is a brown haired person who does not cross his legs. Untill you can prove this your argument is moot, the resolution does not stand, and I win. s://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com...; alt="" /> School Uniforms are often hot: s://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com...; alt="" /> Sweet Jesus! s://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com...; alt="" /> Ajab