I go against it because they don't let you express your personality. I do agree there should be some limits, but at my school you are allowed to have any of 25 outfits: Red, white or navy blue polo shirts or turtlenecks without logos with blue or khaki dress pants or shorts without logos, or the official "PE" uniform. That is too strict.
That is a good point. However, if students wanted to express themselves, they could just compose music of create art. In addition, uniforms also lower the percentage of people who are bullied, seeing as everyone looks the same and nobody can be made fun of because of how they look.
Well, it can cause stress in the students, and stress while learning is not a great mix. Especially with teenagers, where immaturity combined with stress and a lowered inhibition all make a potent mix.
I'm sorry, dear opponent, but this isn't over. I was just busy. To counter your previous statement, uniforms don't cause stress and in fact can relieve it. People spend a lot of time deciding what to wear causing them to be late for school and create stress. You don't have to spend so much time in the morning if you wear the same thing everyday.
Oh sorry. >/////< Your previous argument make a valid point about creativity, but most schools disdain students from drawing. I know, there is art class, but, that at least has some restraints. Your current argument makes another valid point. It may relieve stress from being forced to wear Nike, Reebok, Under Armour, et cetera (etc.) to be popular, but to bring an EXTREMELY valid point, the 1st amendment to the US Constitution gives us 5 freedoms, which includes the Freedom of speech, and people have been challenged for having worn something offensive to another student. THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THAT YOU CAN WEAR THAT. This is why public schools in the USA have very little dress code (paraphernalia of school-inaproppiate). The question should be directed toward charter and private schools, which, NOT under the influence of the gov't, can have a strict dress code.
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited more rounds than con. Con argued that students should be given freedom of expression, pro argued there are other means of expression such as art and music. Con argued that that art and music was censored in school, and that the first amendment gave them the right to express themselves. Pro didn't rebut.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.