The Instigator
CaptainMax
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Should Schools eat people?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/1/2015 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 632 times Debate No: 79241
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

CaptainMax

Pro

Well, to start off. Schools are tasting human blood, with children in it. THEY WILL DEVOUR THE COUNTRY WITH HOMEWORK COUGH DROPS AND PENCIL PILLS. THE SCHOOL IS GOING TO EAT US ANYWAYS! THE FACT IS THAT WHALES ARE IN GLOBAL WARNING WHICH MEANS GLOBAL BALLSACK. THAT MEANS THE GLOBAL BALLSACK IS THE SYMBOL OF THE SUMMONING OF SCHOOLS THAT WILL EAT US. NOM NOM NOOOOOM.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

I accept this debate.

Definitions

Schools - "an institution where instruction is given, especially to persons undercollege age." [http://dictionary.reference.com...]

Eat - "to take into the mouth and swallow for nourishment; chew andswallow (food)." [http://dictionary.reference.com...]

Should - "must; ought (used to indicate duty, propriety, or expediency)." [http://dictionary.reference.com...]

Rebuttals

"Well, to start off. Schools are tasting human blood, with children in it."

This is an unwarranted claim which effectively presupposes the resolution, making it a circular argument. Without any clear evidence for this extraordinary claim, you throw it out.

"THEY WILL DEVOUR THE COUNTRY WITH HOMEWORK COUGH DROPS AND PENCIL PILLS."

Again, this has no warrant and doesn't establish a "should" claim. If anything, because we value human life, this is a reason that shoudls should *not* each children, so it works against PRO's case.

"THE SCHOOL IS GOING TO EAT US ANYWAYS!"

Without warant and doesn't do anything to establish the resolution.

"THE FACT IS THAT WHALES ARE IN GLOBAL WARNING WHICH MEANS GLOBAL BALLSACK. THAT MEANS THE GLOBAL BALLSACK IS THE SYMBOL OF THE SUMMONING OF SCHOOLS THAT WILL EAT US. NOM NOM NOOOOOM."

This is completely unrelated to the resolution.

My Case

C1: Ought Implies Can

If someone is fundamentally incapable of doing something, it cannot possibly be just to say that they "ought" to do something: it's physically and institutionally impossible. Schools, by their nature, cannot eat people, and thus there is no way for PRO to establish this resolution.

C2: Value Human Life

If you eat someone, that person dies. Even if schools could eat people, the highest possible impact in a debate round is human life. Hundreds, or perhaps even thousands, of people would die -- and most would be children, because socialist legislation like "No Child Left Behind" requires them to go to school. Killing and eating people isn't cool.

C3: Crappy Diet

Let's look past C1 for just a moment and consider schools actually eating people. Aside for the indignity to human life, this also would constitute an absolutely horrid dietary choice. Has anyone seen Wall-E, where humans are painted as lazy, obese, good-for-nothing slackers? There is an obesity problem in the United States: people are too fat, and their bodies -- and veins -- are consumed with processed fats and other such crap that will clog their arteries. By eating people, schools would likewise bear these drastically negative ramifications, especially if they are actually going so far, given their sheer size, to eat multiple human beings.

Back to PRO.
Debate Round No. 1
CaptainMax

Pro

Schools are still craving, even with crappy appetite. IT HAS BEEN 3 YEARS SINCE SCHOOLS ONLY ATE CHALK, BUT NOW. THEY WILL TAKE OVER THE WORLD OF 2015-2016!!!!

I know we value our own lives because we have a happy life of tanks and further WW3, BUT THEN, THE GREAT AND POWERFUL SCHOOL. SCHOOL NAMED SCHOOL!!!1
Schools like to bring students in the room, or shall I say. THE ROOM OF DOOOM.
I saw in my own eyes, THE ROOM AS A TERROR OF DIGESTING!
MAKING KIDS' BRAINS MORE SMARTER ALSO CRIPPLING THEIR MINDS

Even obesity can't stop the school! Think of this. School is big room. And obesity kids are 1/4 of the size. So basically, you are expanding the school's stomach.
Whales are whales, they are the helpers of the SCHOOL!
WHALES WILL MAKE IT RAIN FROM THE SKIES IF THE SCHOOL IS THREATENED.
Lol.

Your turn, Mate
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

"Schools are still craving, even with crappy appetite. IT HAS BEEN 3 YEARS SINCE SCHOOLS ONLY ATE CHALK, BUT NOW. THEY WILL TAKE OVER THE WORLD OF 2015-2016!!!!"

PRO has yet to prove to me that schools are physically able to eat anything. Note, from my C1, that ought implies can. If schools are incapabe of eating, we cannot say they "ought" to eat.

Now, let me just ask our audience: Hav you ever been worried that your alma mater would eat you? Did the thought even cross your midn that high schools might have teeth?

No, it didn't, because the idea is preposterous.

"I know we value our own lives because we have a happy life of tanks and further WW3, BUT THEN, THE GREAT AND POWERFUL SCHOOL. SCHOOL NAMED SCHOOL!!!1"

PRO concedes to the value of human life and doesn't contest that it's the strongest impact in this debate. Note that the "we have schools" point is non-unique. In no conceivable world must schools eat to sustain themselves, so in my world these two are not mutually exclusive -- though they are mutually exclusive in PRO' world, where many people would unjustifiably die.

"Schools like to bring students in the room, or shall I say. THE ROOM OF DOOOM.
I saw in my own eyes, THE ROOM AS A TERROR OF DIGESTING!'

See, and this is disgusting because we all have an inalienable right to life, and this is a clear violation of the Non-Aggression Principle: you own your body, you own yourself, and any initiation of force against you is by definition immoral. Don't let schools violate the NAP.

"MAKING KIDS' BRAINS MORE SMARTER ALSO CRIPPLING THEIR MINDS"

The only way to cripple minds is *not* "making kids smarter," which in fact enables them to think and to reason, but to eat them. Therefore, schools shouldn't eat them.

"Even obesity can't stop the school! Think of this. School is big room. And obesity kids are 1/4 of the size. So basically, you are expanding the school's stomach."

But schools are eating multiple obese kids! And, indeed, if schools did have stomachs -- and they don't -- they would grow as a result of their horrid diet, but that's unhealthy. That means that, after eating multiple morbidly obese kids, the schools are in fact becoming morbidly obese, and thus cutting their own life expectancy. If you value life -- of the kids or of the schools -- you'll reject this resolution.

"Whales are whales, they are the helpers of the SCHOOL!

How so, good sir?


WHALES WILL MAKE IT RAIN FROM THE SKIES IF THE SCHOOL IS THREATENED."

How would the school be threatened? Last I checked the kids aren't threatening to eat the school. Have you ever tried a "healthy diet of brick and plaster?" That wouldn't taste so great.
Debate Round No. 2
CaptainMax

Pro

Okay, You are shoving too much logic to this argument.
First of all. Schools are carnivores. due to it's expansion of teethes called pencils. I have eye surgery due to that graphite in my eye, and you could see my black hole in my eye.
It may not eat schools, but it is proven to harm you.
With bad luck and anyway possible.

"PRO concedes to the value of human life and doesn't contest that it's the strongest impact in this debate. Note that the "we have schools" point is non-unique. In no conceivable world must schools eat to sustain themselves, so in my world these two are not mutually exclusive -- though they are mutually exclusive in PRO' world, where many people would unjustifiably die."

You are not a School Supporter, are you? I am afraid this is the evidence that you are a SCHOOL SUPPORTER!
YOU SUPPORT THE SCHOOL TO EAT PEOPLE!
Stop holding back keeping schools with you.

My logic:
Schools are schools, for children to learn. The fact is, 25% of the class is harmed, by the class. Like broken bones, or shattered skulls.
I take my blame on schools. Schools are carnivorous as I said.
There is this. Friend. He committed suicide after the school year. His last words to me was,
"School is nothing but a sorrow place for others."
His body wasn't found, nor internet famous. It was just there.

When you said "Killing or Eating People isn't cool," . Let me reply to you on that
I am not saying I am killing children in their sleep. I am trying to say there are deaths blamed on schools. Kids with fatigues and broken spines.
Whales are whales, the helpers of supporting school. School is a symbolization of

Secret
Controllable
Hesitant
Overly Olaf
Orient
Learners

Based on my studies. This group is composed by one, whale.
Whales may not look so tec ahead. But there are shwon out in San deigo.
With new tricks and stunts that were suppose to be made 5 years after.

Here is the thing, give up. Schools should be stopped. Not forever, but for a while til things get fixed.
Make a reflection and think, S.C.H.O.O.L is no safe place.
Your turn, if you desire
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

"First of all. Schools are carnivores. due to it's expansion of teethes called pencils. I have eye surgery due to that graphite in my eye, and you could see my black hole in my eye."

Both of these statements are completely irrelevant to the resolution, and neither prove that schools *actually* have teeth and can eat. Schools don't "have" pencils; pencils are a writing implement used by people. Pencils don't kill people, but kids with pencils can sure as hell poke another kid's eye out.

"It may not eat schools, but it is proven to harm you.
With bad luck and anyway possible."

He hasn't provena thing, though I don't know what the antecedent of "it is. That schools is the object, not the antecedent means this line stays from the resolution and thus does nothing to accomplish PRO's BOP.

"You are not a School Supporter, are you? I am afraid this is the evidence that you are a SCHOOL SUPPORTER!
YOU SUPPORT THE SCHOOL TO EAT PEOPLE!
Stop holding back keeping schools with you."

I am indeed a school supporter, though I do not support schools eating people -- because schools cannot eat people. That simply doesn't happen.

"Schools are schools, for children to learn. The fact is, 25% of the class is harmed, by the class. Like broken bones, or shattered skulls."

This 25% figure is completely bogus and unsourced, so discard it.

"I take my blame on schools. Schools are carnivorous as I said."

Again no proof.

"There is this. Friend. He committed suicide after the school year. His last words to me was,
"School is nothing but a sorrow place for others."
His body wasn't found, nor internet famous. It was just there."

Anecdotal evidence and, once again, no proof.

"I am not saying I am killing children in their sleep. I am trying to say there are deaths blamed on schools. Kids with fatigues and broken spines."

No, the resolution is saying that schools *should* eat and kill people. You're not even affording kids the humanity of being eaten in their sleep. In order to prove "should," you need to prove "can." You've done neither.

"Based on my studies. This group is composed by one, whale.
Whales may not look so tec ahead. But there are shwon out in San deigo.
With new tricks and stunts that were suppose to be made 5 years after."

This is completely senseless and non-topical.

"Here is the thing, give up. Schools should be stopped. Not forever, but for a while til things get fixed.
Make a reflection and think, S.C.H.O.O.L is no safe place."


This is a concession. Note that PRO had to argue that schools *should* eat people.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 9 months ago
ESocialBookworm
"By eating people, schools would likewise bear these drastically negative ramifications, especially if they are actually going so far, given their sheer size, to eat multiple human beings."
*dies of laughter*
Posted by debate-master1 1 year ago
debate-master1
How are schools? Carnivores
Posted by ResponsiblyIrresponsible 1 year ago
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Shout-out to Bossy: I ran the NAP!
Posted by CaptainMax 1 year ago
CaptainMax
I am back! >:3
Posted by Diqiucun_Cunmin 1 year ago
Diqiucun_Cunmin
This is the funniest noobsniped debate since sliced bread.
Posted by defyingcynism 1 year ago
defyingcynism
Finally, a man who understands the concepts of life. Thankyou Captain Max for trying to open the eyes of so many. I trust in you and your argument.
Posted by TubOLard 1 year ago
TubOLard
I'm guessing Captain Max does not come back, meaning Con has wasted his time.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
CaptainMaxResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Lots of unnecessary capital letters used by Pro.
Vote Placed by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
CaptainMaxResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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: S&G goes to Con. Pro randomly capitalizes words and sentences that don't need to be capitalized. He also puts a period on the middle of sentences which they don't belong. Pro looses on convincing arguments because all of his arguments are based on "Schools can do x and schools can do Y" Yet, he never provides us with evidence that schools can do such things. Con argues that Pro's claims are all merely based on assumption and opinions. Con makes successful arguments that school are incapable of eating children. Even if they did, thousands or millions of kids would be dead now. Sources go to Con because he used a dictionary source to define terms.