The Instigator
bloyoin
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
OtakuJordan
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Do schools have the right to segregate busses based on gender?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
OtakuJordan
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/26/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 956 times Debate No: 41290
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

bloyoin

Con

I am totally against it. The Jackson County code of conduct states that students have all the rights listed in the constitution, segregation is against the constitution, therefore schools, or anyone does not have the right to split up certain groups, no matter what the reason.
OtakuJordan

Pro

I would like to thank Con for setting up this debate. I look forward to a good discussion.

I would like to use my first measure of allotted speaking time simply to ask my opponent to provide a citation for his claim that separating students by gender for any reason is unconstitutional.
Debate Round No. 1
bloyoin

Con

First of all... It is in the title... Segregation. Do you happen to recall the civil rights movement? Even though it was segregation of race, not gender it was still segregation, it is the same thing. Segregation of any kind is still segregation no matter how little or how large the issue, it is still segregation.
It clearly states in the 14 th amendment gives everyone equal rights by law, and the Declaration of Independence says "...All men are created equal..." Therefore all people have equal rights, even rights to choose their own bus seat, this means any person can sit wherever they please.
OtakuJordan

Pro

"Segregation," or separation as I shall be calling it henceforth, of people by gender is not illegal in all cases. Examples of legalized sex separation in America include the separation of men from women in locker rooms, bathrooms, prison cells, military housing, etc. Also, certain groups, such as the Boy Scouts or all-women colleges, are able to obtain government permission to admit only people of a specified gender into their institution or organization.(1)

All of the above-mentioned cases serve to show that gender separation is not always illegal or harmful, thus refuting my opponent's claim that "segregation of any kind is still segregation" and that it is unconstitutional. More specific to the case at hand, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 gives educational establishments the right to separate students by gender.(2)

I would also like to point out to my opponent that the Declaration of Independence is not a legal bill and has no actual bearing on this discussion.

Sources
1. Cohen, David S. 2010. "The Stubborn Persistence of Sex Segregation." Columbia Journal of Gender and Law
2. Ibid.
Debate Round No. 2
bloyoin

Con

I do agree with your statements, but as I had also said, in the Jackson County code of conduct, it clearly states that students have all the rights listed in the constitution, the 14th amendment gives everyone equal rights, therefore it is stating, if a male can sit in the first bus seat, so can a female (and visa verse). this amendment (and all amendments) are given to every United States citizens, not just men, and not just women. Therefore, any person can sit in any bus seat they choose, no one can force them to move, do you recall Rosa Parks? The same thing, but with gender, not race. If someone on the bus were to sit in the "Wrong Section" we would get a wright up and a discipline mark, it could even go to an extent of people getting suspended for "Defiance" so basically, students get in trouble for standing up for themselves and actually using their education of law and amendments to prove that what the schools and bus drivers is doing is clearly unconstitutional.
OtakuJordan

Pro

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Educational Amendments of 1972 help to define the power of the Fourth Amendment. All you are doing by bringing the Fourt Amendment up again and again is showing a complete lack of knowledge of how the Constitution and our legal system work.

I would like to add to my previous legal arguments the concept of in loco parentis. This legal concept means that your school functions as your parent or guardian and not a government institution ruling over you while you are in their care. Because of this, your school is able to do such things as administer corporal punishment without the need for a trial or give a "random drug testing" to students despite the Fourth Amendment's(!!!) Search and Seizure clause. Such things have been upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court.(1)

Sources
1. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 3
bloyoin

Con

I must bring up something I have already laid out on the table, every student in the school have the same rights, rights to a bus seat, rights to a locker, rights to their books and supplies ext. therefore, any student can sit wherever they want on the bus.
I also must bring up your statements, "I would like to add to my previous legal arguments the concept of in loco parentis. This legal concept means that your school functions as your parent or guardian and not a government institution ruling over you while you are in their care. Because of this, your school is able to do such things as administer corporal punishment without the need for a trial or give a "random drug testing" to students despite the Fourth Amendment's(!!!) Search and Seizure clause. Such things have been upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court.(1)" Pre-school/Day care teachers or administrators do not have the right to give certain punishments/snacks ext. unless asked by the parent, and the reason I am
bringing this up is because you sated (above) that the schools could do whatever punishment ""without the need to give a trial"" well this is incorrect to an extent, if in any case the law is brought in the students are allowed a laser/trial ext. because of their amendment rights.
OtakuJordan

Pro

My opponent seems to be unaware that the Constitution contains no blanket statement declaring all "segregation" to be illegal, and also seems intent on ignoring my proof that this is so. While it is true that under the Fourth Amendment students all have equal rights, the Fourth Amendment does not fully define what those rights are. As I have stated multiple times now, that falls to other legal documents such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Educational Amendments of 1972. These legal documents clearly show that gender separation is legal in some cases.

My opponent said that I had said that school officials could administer any punishment to students they chose without need for trial. This is a gross misrepresentation of my actual statements.
Debate Round No. 4
bloyoin

Con

bloyoin forfeited this round.
OtakuJordan

Pro

Because my opponent forfeited the final round, I shall simply summarize my previous arguments.

Argument #1 - There are legal and moral reasons to separate people by gender
Separation of people by gender is not automatically immoral or unconstitutional. There are many instances of legalized sex separation in our country (e.g., separate public restrooms for men and women).

Argument #2 - Educational establishments have the right to separate by gender
"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 give educational establishments the right to separate students by gender."

Argument #3 - In loco parentis
"The concept of in loco parentis. This legal concept means that your school functions as your parent or guardian and not a government institution ruling over you while you are in their care. Because of this, your school is able to do such things as administer corporal punishment without the need for a trial or give a "random drug testing" to students despite the Fourth Amendment's(!!!) Search and Seizure clause. Such things have been upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court."

Conclusion
I would like to thank Con for raising this interesting topic for debate.

Please vote Pro.





Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
I was simply pointing out an amusing typo. I would not mind if someone did the same to me. Also, the word crude means "lacking tact or taste; blunt or offensive" while the word insolent means "showing a rude and arrogant lack of respect." My comment was neither and was not taken as such by bloyoin.
Posted by Alexandrethegreat 3 years ago
Alexandrethegreat
OtakuJordan, if possible try not to use sarcasm when not necessary. This website does not need your crude and insolent comments. Thank you.
Posted by bloyoin 3 years ago
bloyoin
Ha ha! I didn't even realize that mistake until just now! What I meant was Lawyer, thank you for catching that.
Posted by OtakuJordan 3 years ago
OtakuJordan
If the law is brought in the students are given a laser? You must go to an awesome school.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by janetsanders733 3 years ago
janetsanders733
bloyoinOtakuJordanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Good job to both debaters. However, Pro cited his sources, and provided BoP. Con on the other hand kept repeating the same argument using the Jackson County Segreation Act. Pro showed that segregation in some cases can be legal, and not immoral(bathroom, gender, locker rooms,etc.). Points go to Pro.
Vote Placed by yay842 3 years ago
yay842
bloyoinOtakuJordanTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF