The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Bad words should be allowed in school.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/3/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,026 times Debate No: 19126
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




This is only accepting round. This topic is about that bad words should be allowed in schools such as f--k or b---h. THIS ROUND IS ONLY ACCEPTING!!!

I am con and you are pro

Con=Against (Bad words should not be allowed in school)
Pro=For (Bad words should be allowed in school)


Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1



I think bad words should not be allowed because it can lower your cumulative grades and you can get expelled. Also, it can make people down and many people will start hating you. I will stop here. I will expand more as Necessary.

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate.


First, I will establish my case and then refute my opponent's case.

I. Limiting speech is a violation of the first amendment. The first amendment gives the freedom of speech; others are not supposed to be regulating what we can and can't say. These rights also apply to minors, as the supreme court has ruled multiple times. Since schools that don't allow profanity are regulating what we can and can't say, then that violates the freedom of speech. (Source: U.S. Bill of Rights)

II. Liberty, a fundamental human right, is violated in banning words in schools. John Locke, a key inspiration of our founding fathers, stated that life, liberty, and property were the fundamental human rights. Our founding fathers based our country on these ideals. Banning words in school takes away some of our liberty; you can't do what you want. A political philosophy that we founded our country on was that anyone can do as they want as long as it doesn't hurt others or take money/possesions away from others.

III. There is no reason directly related to the use of profanity to why it should not be allowed. Quoting Thomas Jefferson, "If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me?" Anything can be used as a disruption in class; profanity can be used as a disruption in class, but so can every other word in every other lanugage. The use of profanity isn't causing anyone to die, or be hurt, and it isn't causing anyone to have to pay money.

Now onto my opponent's case.

My opponent stated that profanity can lower your cumulative grades and you can get expelled for it. The resolution is that profanity SHOULD be allowed in schools- if it is allowed in schools like it should be, you wouldn't be able to get expelled for it. Also, as it is, at most you'd probably get a suspension, never an expusion. Also, he didn't explain how it makes grades lower. He also argues that it can mark people down and make people hate you; however, if you go to a school, most students use profanity, and so that argument is invalid. Also, if it did make someone hate you, that is your problem to deal with; it is not where the school intervenes. The school should not ban something on the basis that it could make someone "hate" you. According to the USA Today, 64% of America uses the F word, so really it is a majority of people rather than a minority.

How does profanity lower cumulaitve grades?
Debate Round No. 2


You are asking me how does profanity let your grades down? Well some teachers (like mine) put the cumalative together as: Homework, Tests, Participation, and Behaivor. Freedom is for being positive and not negative.


In most schools today, profanity does count as poor behavior in their policies- however, this is about whether or not they SHOULD be allowed in schools. If they are allowed in schools, points wouldn't be allowed to be taken off for behavior.

Freedom is NOT just for being positive- in Brandenburg v Ohio, the supreme court ruled that any free speech is allowed so long as it does not cause imminent lawless action- which is disobeying a law intentionally and fast as a result of your speech. Its fine to go up to someone and say "I don't like you". Look at what we have today- all these people criticizing the government and especially President Obama. This just shows that freedom is for postive and negative, the constitution doesn't care if you are trying to be unkind to someone.

Are you saying it should be illegal to criticize the government, because that is a negative freedom?
Debate Round No. 3


danger93 forfeited this round.


Overall, limiting speech is a violation of liberty, the first amendment, and has no real benefits. My opponent could not show any evidence and incorrectly stated that freedom doesn't count if you are being negative.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by danger93 4 years ago
Hey dude I didn't have time to post an arguement. I really didn't forfeit it. f--k
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Even with the flaws in Pro's argument, its hard to see how Con would have rebut them with his short responses. But Con's FF makes it irrelevant.