The Instigator
Phoenix_Reaper
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Eleventh and Twelfth grade should be earned.

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 5 votes the winner is...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/21/2011 Category: Education
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 854 times Debate No: 16047
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (5)

 

Phoenix_Reaper

Pro

From my personal experience in the Education system I am quite certain eleventh and twelfth grade where useless to others and myself time. To add insult to injury to the current system most students I have interacted with not only think the same way but completely neglect the resources to learn and just sit back and wait for the timer to run out.

For me I started sitting back during those last two years and ever since it has impacted me and made me careless. The staff at the school I have attend know who these students are and I am certain teachers all around can spot those such students. Students like myself contributed nothing to the class room and only cost the tax payers money without the people getting their worth.

Those students that embrace the education system should be allowed to further their learning career in any manner they wish.

The bases of the argument is that students that are questionable about their learning and their attitude be sent off to the Military.

Questionable about their learning:

Blatant disregard to fellow students and staff.
Fail to do any work even when helped is offered by staff.
Constantly interrupt the teachers dug lessons.
Constant refusal to do anything productive within their environment.

Such students are a liability to other students who wish to further themselves but are being held back. By sending them off to the Military they can be taught discipline and skills according to the job they get in service.

There are certain restrictions I would propose such as they are NOT allowed to go into combat or near it and any job that is considered high risk.

They could be useful in other jobs throughout the Military. Two years of Military service would also provide for a much larger job base for those with no skills such as private security. Those that embrace it could get skills that may assist in other areas of work and further their lives.

High level education should be earned not given. Give to much than it may be taken advantage of and mocked.
socialpinko

Con

My opponent brings up some good points as solutions for children who are clearly a drain on the public education system. Below I will quote my opponent's proposed solution and refute it.

I also assume my opponent is talking about American public school as when one looks at his profile it says he is from the U.S. I would also like to wish my opponent the best of luck on his first debate.

My opponent's resolution of which he is defending.

"The bases of the argument is that students that are questionable about their learning and their attitude be sent off to the Military."

I accept my opponent's definition of questionable students.

My opponent says that if a student does not take school seriously then putting them in the military and consequently giving them a stake in this nation's national security will fix the problem.

//"Such students are a liability to other students who wish to further themselves but are being held back. By sending them off to the Military they can be taught discipline and skills according to the job they get in service."//

My opponent believes that giving a problem child a stake in the U.S. military, which is publicly funded just like the public school system, will somehow take the burden off of the American taxpayer. Taxpayers already pay over 655 billion dollars every year on the military budget not including veteran benefits or the "war on terror"[1]

My opponent has yet to show why taking troubled children out of the educational system and giving them a stake in national security will solve anything.

[1]http://www.warresisters.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Phoenix_Reaper

Pro

First I would like to thank the Con for accepting my debate. Also would like to apologize for not stating, yes I am referring to the American school system.

"My opponent says that if a student does not take school seriously then putting them in the military and consequently giving them a stake in this nation's national security will fix the problem. "

I see where you are going with this statement. The Military is not only a national security position but it is also a job. As crucial the Military is to our security it is not reliant on a single person. Their job within the Military determines their part in national security, to an extent in my suggestion.

As I mentioned," There are certain restrictions I would propose such as they are NOT allowed to go into combat or near it and any job that is considered high risk. " End result being that are more responsible for maintenance or even janitor duties.

"My opponent believes that giving a problem child a stake in the U.S. military, which is publicly funded just like the public school system, will somehow take the burden off of the American taxpayer. "

You are correct by saying that public funds also go to the Military. Public funds also go to housing inmates on petty charges that cost more than a child's education. [1]

One way or another these students will cost the tax payers money but which choice is more rewarding to the people paying the bill. Clearly I argue that the Military offers a much more worth while end result. There are, in the Marines, eighty different job types and that is not including sub positions in those jobs.[2] At first glance that may seem small but the Marines are meant to be the smallest branch and they employ which is approximately 180,000.

"My opponent has yet to show why taking troubled children out of the educational system and giving them a stake in national security will solve anything. "

Correct I have failed to provide aqueduct information towards nation security. Below will explain more.

"Military schools are most appropriate for children and teenagers who do not have any underlying emotional or behavioral problems. " [3]

Students without emotional problems, as elaborated on in cite three, assist in their discipline. Discipline is one of the crux's of my argument not nation security. Yes nation security is always a concern but young students would not be on the front lines or any other high risk areas, I would also take the liberty and say Intel job would be off limits.

[1]http://www.insidehighered.com...
[2]http://www.aspeneducation.com...
[3]http://usmilitary.about.com...
socialpinko

Con

I asked my opponent why giving troubld children a stake in national security will solve anything. My opponent responded with:

As I mentioned," There are certain restrictions I would propose such as they are NOT allowed to go into combat or near it and any job that is considered high risk. " End result being that are more responsible for maintenance or even janitor duties.

My opponent cannot deny that being on a military base or with other military personelle where there is possible access to weapons is not more dangerous for a troubled child to be in then a classroom in a school where there is not a gun allowed within 100 feet.

//"You are correct by saying that public funds also go to the Military. Public funds also go to housing inmates on petty charges that cost more than a child's education. [1]"//

This is simply a red herring. This debate is not regarding whether people should be detained for petty crimes but whether or not people should be sent off to the military for behavioral problems.

//"One way or another these students will cost the tax payers money but which choice is more rewarding to the people paying the bill. Clearly I argue that the Military offers a much more worth while end result."//

Please elaborate on how this is a more rewarding way for tax payer's money to be spent on.

I would also like to brig up another point against my opponent's plan. It is the issue of pacifism. Many religios such as Buddhism or Christianity can be interpreted to mean that one musts commit to absolute pacifism. This means that they cannot commit a single act of violence or asist anyone who commits a single act of violence. Forcing one to jon the military can contradict their philosophical and religious beliefs and thus violates the first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

As you can see forcing one to assist the military in any way is a violation of the Constitution and is thus illegal.

I now pass the debate back to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 2
Phoenix_Reaper

Pro

"My opponent cannot deny that being on a military base or with other military personelle where there is possible access to weapons is not more dangerous for a troubled child to be in then a classroom in a school where there is not a gun allowed within 100 feet. "

First off allow me to define troubled. I, and maybe others, are confusing troubled with emotional problems.

Troubled - A cause or source of distress, disturbance, or difficulty.

"Military schools are most appropriate for children and teenagers who do not have any underlying emotional or behavioral problems. "

Yes they are within weapons most of the time but not with ammo. While on bases within the states Military Police are the only people with loaded guns, also which is considered a moderate risk. The only time these young individuals would be using a gun would be boot camp.

Boot camp is meant to teach these kids the discipline they need in order to be able to handle any such responsibility they encounter including handling a gun.

As to the classroom connection you are partially correct. Yes the guns are not allowed within the school limits but it does happen. Such examples as Columbine.

My opponent said, "Please elaborate on how this is a more rewarding way for tax payer's money to be spent on. "

A student who leaves a publicly funded educational establishment with nothing more than a diploma because the staff did not want to deal with the student is a waste of funds. Such students also who waste time of teachers and students and disturb the learning process are a waste of funds. Such students, again, hurt others ability to learn.

While in the Military such students can be of use by reasonable means as ordered by their superior.

The title of this debate is Eleventh and Twelfth grade should be earned.

As I have mentioned in my opening argument;

Questionable about their learning:

Blatant disregard to fellow students and staff.
Fail to do any work even when helped is offered by staff.
Constantly interrupt the teachers dug lessons.
Constant refusal to do anything productive within their environment.

My opponent brings up a point of pacifism. Certainly a person who is pacifist will not fit in any of those problems above. He has also brought up the points of religion. According to their teachings, if followed, than those students would not fall into this category.

The bases of the argument is that students that are questionable about their learning and their attitude be sent off to the Military.
socialpinko

Con

socialpinko forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by anarcholibertyman 6 years ago
anarcholibertyman
Phoenix_ReapersocialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gets conduct for the forfeit but pro could not refute con's claim about absolute pacifism and religious freedom. Absolute pacifism does not contradict pro's definition of questionable behavior.
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 6 years ago
quarterexchange
Phoenix_ReapersocialpinkoTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited
Vote Placed by bradshaw93 6 years ago
bradshaw93
Phoenix_ReapersocialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con could not overcome Con's argument from pacifism.
Vote Placed by kohai 6 years ago
kohai
Phoenix_ReapersocialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited the last round, therefore pro gets conduct. He also had better sources and better-convincing arguments.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
Phoenix_ReapersocialpinkoTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: One would hope this is not a start of another string of forfeits by Con. Both sides could severely use some kind of point summary/separation between arguments/rebuttal.