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

Compulsory education is a form of kidnapping designed to train children to accept the class hierarch

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 12/17/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 464 times Debate No: 67203
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




The compulsory education process trains the occupants in schools to accept the status quo of the hierarchal class structure. It teaches the students to work for someone else instead of creating their own businesses. It also breaks up the family structure.


I accept this debate and defer to PRO so that (s)he may make his/her case.
Debate Round No. 1


I am willing to debate. I fee I have made a preliminary argument already. Unless you can provide information to the contrary I feel my case has been made.


PRO feels the argument has been made, so I will address it.

The Argument...So Far

PRO's argument so far is basically this:

P1: Mandatory education teaches students to accept the status quo.
P2: Mandatory education teaches students to sell their labor.
P3: Mandatory education breaks up the structure of families.
C: Mandatory education is kidnapping.

Evidence, or, Lack Thereof

I would like to start by pointing out that PRO has not offered any evidence in support of the premises to his/her argument. At this point, they are bald assertions that can be dismissed. I see no reason to argue against them, as I do not carry that burden.

Does Not Follow

Even if we accept PRO's premises, which I do not, the conclusion does not follow. Kidnapping is defined as the illegal seizure of another person by force or fraud [1]. This is not a description of the education system, so even if PRO can demonstrate the premises, the conclusion does not follow.



Debate Round No. 2


compulsory [1]
: required by a law or rule
: having the power of forcing someone to do something
Full Definition of COMPULSORY
1: mandatory, enforced
2: coercive, compelling

Key word being enforced

I would ask that MrJosh to provide some premise as to his rebuttal.



I thank PRO for his comments this round. I have only two points with which to conclude.


PRO correctly defines "compulsory," but fails to see that it doesn't make mandatory school kidnapping. As I mentioned in the previous round, kidnapping is, by definition, an ILLEGAL seizure of a person [1]. If the laws of a particular jurisdiction provide for compulsory schooling, than it is completely legal, and cannot be considered kidnapping. This point alone sinks PRO's case.
Still Doesn't Follow
As I pointed out in the previous round, even if we accept PRO's premises, which he has not supported with evidence, they do not lead to the claimed conclusion. PRO has not addressed this point, and it stands.
Wrapping Up
PRO made an initial claim in setting up this debate. He failed to meet this burden by providing evidence for his claims, or even a valid argument. I had no burden, and carried no requirement to debunk PRO's claims.
Finally, I would like to thank PRO for setting up this debate; it has been enjoyable.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by MrJosh 1 year ago
You claimed that it was kidnapping. I showed that it was not.
Posted by mentalist 1 year ago
I would only like to add that my argument stated that it was a form of kidnapping. i don't think MrJosh provided any substantial argument to dissuade that contention. He also did not address the other points that were made.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Valladarex 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con effectively explained that compulsory education isn't equivalent to kidnapping, as kidnapping is illegal and the government legally forces kids to go to school. Pro provides no evidence-based arguments for his case.