Corporal Punishment in schools
Corporal Punishment should not be a tactic used by teachers to recieve the expected behavior of a student.
R1: Acceptance + Position (No addition arguments, refer above for an example)
Thank you and good luck in advance to Pro.
Good luck, Lordknukle.
Why shouldn't it be legal?
Corporal punishment in school facilities involves the hitting/beating of a student if they have disobeyed class room or school rules. If corporal punishment were to be implemented as a form of disciplinary action, there is no doubt that students would cease to disobey rules. However, this method can and will severely damage a student's trust with their teachers. As a result of this, the student loses that connection with their teacher to the point where they can't go to them a source of comfort. For example:
Because this damages their teacher-student relationship, the student will most likely avoid using that teacher as a source of comfort for other issues he may be having (bullying, grades, etc).
I believe that is either extremely disobedient in class or has bad grades has either or both of these:
At home: Lets refer to the year 2006. This year, 61% (or 1.25M) children were victims of some form of neglect. These include not only physical, but mental, educational, emotional, and even sexual (http://pediatrics.about.com...). Neglect and abuse at home has a tremendous effect on a child, and to prove this, please take the time to read some of these stories:
These children (mostly young) were all subject to some form of abuse. I'd like to point out one girl's story:
Take Judy's story and add the factor of corporal punishment in school. This would only add to here extremely bad situation and would have most likely ended up worse than it did.
I thank my opponent for posting his arguments.
I will bring up my own points and rebut some of my opponent's points.
I will elaborate on my rebuttals in future rounds, as I ran out of room.
I would like the readers to notice that my opponent is often the logical fallacy called "Appeal to Emotion". I will expand on this accusation later in the debate.
Before I begin my debate, I would like to say that I am not arguing for an extreme. I will be arguing for a moderate amount of corporal punishment.
My 5 contentions will be:
1. Corporal punishment serves as a deterrent
2. Corporal punishment saves the child's future
3. Corporal punishment is not abuse
4.Corporal punishment increases productivity
5. The Bible supports corporal punishment
Before anybody starts bashing me on my biblical argument, I would like to point out that my opponent has not set any criteria for available arguments. Therefore, I will use whatever I want. The Bible is provided as more of a "bonus" contention.
C1:Corporal punishment serves as a deterrent
Corporal punishment by itself, is not different that another type of punishment.
It is clear to everybody that punishment serves as a deterrent. If my opponent's tries to negate this, then he will have a very hard time.
Just the idea alone makes sense. If I add a punishment onto an action, the person will be less likely to commit the action again.
This applies to corporal punishment.
If a teacher slaps person X for verbal abuse, then he will most likely not do it again for fear of being slapped.
These practices successfully transition into a child's later life.... leading me to my next point
C2: Corporal punishment saves the child's future
Corporal punishment, in moderation, early in a child's life helps save their future.
Dr. Walter E. Williams, a famous economist says (2):
"Today, it's not uncommon for young criminals to be arrested, counseled and released to the custody of a parent 20 or 30 times before they spend one night in jail. Such a person is a very good candidate for later serving a long prison sentence or, worse, facing the death penalty. If you interviewed such a person and asked: "Thinking back to when you started your life of crime, would you have preferred a punishment, such as caning, that might have set you straight or be where you are today?" I'd bet my retirement money that he'd say he wished someone had caned some sense into him. That being the case, which is more cruel: caning or allowing such a person to become a criminal?"
"Experts theorize that corporal punishment helps create more disciplined and hard-working students and civilians that develop to be more prudent financially. When a nation develops its students into responsible citizens, the entire nation ultimately benefits through increased productivity and efficiency in the economy. Students learn through corporal punishment that there are greater objectives and goals beyond themselves. They ultimately learn to contribute to the economy in a positive way."(5)
I know that we are talking about corporal punishment in schools, but this directly relates back to it. "Whipping" out any bad practices early in a child's life is acceptable as it saves them from committing the same mistake in a unforgiving and cruel adult world.
Many children that would be corporally punished in schools are the "back-talkers", the interrupters, and verbal abusers. It is better to prevent these practices in childhood. In the adult world, verbal abuse and "back-talking" to your superiors is not tolerated. These practices can cause a child to lose their job, and even worse, their future.
This discouragement of bad habits sets children up to succeed.
Children are more impressionable than adults. Therefore, these effects will be amplified in them. (3)
C3: Corporal Punishment is not abuse
My opponent's main arguments are centered around abuse and corporal punishment. Abuse is:
To prove that a corporal punishment is not abuse, I must show that there is at least one positive effect of corporal punishment.
I have shown that corporal punishment saves a child's life in the future (and I will show how it increases productivity).
Therefore, corporal punishment is not abuse.
The logic goes as follows:
1. Abuse consists of using something for a bad purpose of effect
2. Corporal punishment helps children later in their life
3. Therefore, corporal punishment is not abuse.
This negates many of my opponent's points about abuse.
C4: Corporal punishment increases productivity
Corporal punishment increases productivity.
According to Surinder Kahai:
"Contingent punishment behaviors also have been found to be beneficial by promoting group drive and productivity"(6)
"Contingent reward behavior has been found to promote group drive, cohesiveness, and productivity. Contingent punishment behaviors also have been found to be beneficial by promoting group drive and productivity " (6)
This debate is not whether contingent punishment or contingent rewards are more efficient, simply about whether contingent punishment increases productivity.
However, corporal punishment also serves as a incentive.
Not everybody is going to get corporally punished. Corporal punishment also serves as a stimulant for those who don't misbehave.
By not getting punished, they think that they are doing the correct thing. Therefore, they will keep doing it.
This promotes good behaviour in those who already have it, and reduces bad behavior in those who misbehave.
C5: The Bible promotes corporal punishment
This serves as a "bonus" contention. According to the Bible:
Proverbs 23:14. The authorship is traditionally attributed to King Solomon: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell."
"He who spareth his rod hateth his son, but he who loveth him is chasteneth him betimes." (King Solomon, in the Book of Proverbs [13:24].
"Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; The rod of correction will drive it far from him." (Proverbs 22:15)
"Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod. And deliver his soul from hell." (Proverbs 23:13)
I fail to see how trust issues with teachers relate to students.
A teacher is not there to provide a source of comfort, merely a source for teaching and learning.
A school has guidance counselors which the students can go to if they have issues, not the teachers.
I assume that we are not talking about corporal punishment in the very low grades.
Since about Grade 3/4 and up, student/teacher relationships are merely focused on teaching.
In Junior High School, High School and University, there is virtually no student/teacher relationship.
Corporal punishment would not damage any trust issues with teachers as there aren't any.
If the student has problems, there is always a guidance counselor.
I would like to point out that my opponent is using "Appeal to Emotion" in this subtopic as he is listing random sad stories of children getting abused.
My opponent has also listed statistics (which I doubt are correct, but I will accept them for this point) that are completely irrelevant to this topic.
I have shown how Corporal Punishment is not abuse, therefore negating many of my opponent's points.
I am running out of room so I will quickly wrap this up. I have shown how corporal punishment serves as a deterrent to future misbehaving, saves the child's future, is not abuse, increases productivity, and the Bible promotes it.
Good luck to CON
Conspiracy_Theory forfeited this round.
Well this is dissapointing. I was expecting my opponent's rebuttals.
Anyways, my arguments stand as is. They have not been refuted.
I urge that the voters
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|