The Instigator
hghppjfan
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
imabench
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Silent Lunches are the worst thing to happen.

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 4 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/7/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,618 times Debate No: 25491
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

hghppjfan

Pro

Welcome challenger.
I wish you good luck for your rounds.
imabench

Con

I will argue that Silent lunches arent the worst thing to happen

Examples:

World War 1
World War 2
The Holocaust
Slavery
Forced Female Circumcision
Global Warming
Pollution of the planet
Hitler
Stalin
M. Night Shyalaman
Pol Pot
Osama Bin Laden
9/11
Pineapples
Cancer
Aids
Herpes
Starvation

And the worst one of all of them.........

WOMENS RIGHTS!!!!!!!
Debate Round No. 1
hghppjfan

Pro

I may have misstated the title. The argument is that Silent Lunches are the worst idea for punishments in schools. I have a high suggestion of this because I used to be in a series of silent lunches. Here is what I found out about it from my own experience:

A. Silent lunches turn students on the rebellious side. Some of my friends are starting to turn rebellious because of the constant silent lunches.
B. Silent lunches conserve bad energy. Lunch is one of the few times that students can freely talk to each other. Since we were on silent lunches, our energy turned extremely and was conned toward the teachers. It even once turned so bad to physical fighting.
C. Silent Lunches cause more trouble. with the stuff that I mentioned in B, silent lunch behaviors also include rebelling for rights to talk , teachers that students don't have other than for clubs suffer through the bad energy explosion.
D. Finally, it causes parents to work harder on calming the children. Most parents work on normal jobs and need to conserve energy. A bad energy crisis may cause parents to suffer more.

Now it is your turn.
imabench

Con

"I may have misstated the title"

I know Im just f*cking with ya ;D

"The argument is that Silent Lunches are the worst idea for punishments in schools"

Oh ok. Since the debate is whether or not silent lunches are the worst IDEAS for punishments in school, I will provide a list for possible IDEAS that would be way worse then silent lunches.

1 - Selling students into sex slavery
2 - Cutting off fingers of students
3 - Breaking the limbs of students
4 - Forcing the students to listen to any music by Nicki Minaj or Justin Bieber for a prolonged period of time
5 - Shaving the heads of all students
6 - Tripling the amount of HW given to students as punishment
7 - Forcing them to not eat their lunch
8 - Forcing all the students into gas chambers nude and gassing them with steam just to scare them
9 - Forcing students to work in work camps
10 - Whipping the students
11 - Spanking the students
12 - Wedgies
13 - Acts of public humiliation against them
14 - Forcing all students to fight to the death in a Hunger Games style arena
15 - Forcing all students to shower at Penn State
16 - Abandoning all the students on a deserted Island
17 - Lacing all the water in water fountains with acid and PCP
18 - Forcing all students to watch the first three seasons of Jersey Shore, in one sitting, and they cant talk at all
19 - Taking away all students cell phones
20 - Killing half of the students and using their blood to paint the walls of the school to let the other half know whose boss.



Those are ideas for punishing students that are worse than Silent Lunches. Now I will examine the Pro's arguments and try to give this debate some legitimacy :P

"A. Silent lunches turn students on the rebellious side. Some of my friends are starting to turn rebellious because of the constant silent lunches."

1) Your friends are demons, kill them
2) Students will become rebellious no matter what punishment you give them, and besides what the hell are your friends going to do to be rebellious? Paint "Kyle waz here" on the bathroom stalls?

"B. Silent lunches conserve bad energy. Lunch is one of the few times that students can freely talk to each other. Since we were on silent lunches, our energy turned extremely and was conned toward the teachers. It even once turned so bad to physical fighting."

1) Students will fight each other over a klondike bar and their negative energy could come from any number of things that arent silent lunches.
2) What could students possibly talk about to each other that cant wait until lunch is over or until school is over? I have never once in high school had to tell someone something so important that it couldnt wait 2 hours for me to tell them later. Most stuff kids talk about is related to either Pokemon, TV, or High school drama, thats it.

"C. Silent Lunches cause more trouble. with the stuff that I mentioned in B, silent lunch behaviors also include rebelling for rights to talk , teachers that students don't have other than for clubs suffer through the bad energy explosion."

1) ALL punishments cause trouble, make peace with that. Keep in mind, all you have to do is keep quiet for how long 40 minutes? Its not impossible and students can handle it without shooting up the school...
2) If your bad energy explodes out of you onto your teachers, then you are just horny and it explains all the other psychotic bad attitude that students have

"D. Finally, it causes parents to work harder on calming the children. Most parents work on normal jobs and need to conserve energy. A bad energy crisis may cause parents to suffer more."

1) How the f*ck is this bad energy "crisis" caused only by being quiet for 40 minutes and not from any possible combination of violent video games, puberty, sexually explicit tv shows, very violent cartoons, large amounts of homework, having to wake up early, having to learn tons useless sh*t you probably wont need in 15 years, having to argue on the internet against complete strangers for the votes of other complete strangers, not being able to stay up as late as you want, possible sibling rivalries that drive people crazy, etc etc

Look point is this negative energy crisis doesnt come exclusively from silent lunches because students can handle shutting up for 40 minutes and eating, thats what they want to do when they eat dinner and breakfast anyways! Whats the only thing you think in your mind when your mom, dad, sister, or brother is talking to you while you eat? "shutupshutupshutupshutupshutupshutupshutupshutupshutupshutupshutup" is my guess.

2) Students can be calmed down by ANYTHING. Give a student $5 to stop acting like an a**hole and I guarantee they will stop moaning about how their lives are so "complicated"

3) Parents will suffer no matter how their kid is acting. You ever see a parent who has one or more small children who are always smiling and laughing everywhere they go? Yeah, they want to blow their brains out with a 12 gauge shotgun......
Debate Round No. 2
hghppjfan

Pro

Give you credit, you are GREAT debater.

Here is what I will rebuttal them:

A.1 Most of my friends are not demons, they are kind and participated in NJHS.

A.2 Cannot disagree

B.1 The one fight was a rebellious act because of the silent lunches to prove that the students hated it

B.2 Most of the people that I see during school are not in my classes and/or are not in the community and/or do not have their phone numbers for that I can communicate with them. I cannot communicate with them other than lunch.

C.1 Not nessecarely. You can be optimistic and say "Hey, at least it wasn't as bad as this."

C.2 In one story I read (forgot what it was called), if energy is used more, it will cause less bad energy to be put upon another person.

D.1 Energy is usually conserved in the classroom based upon to be used on lunch. Lunch, as I mentioned in B.2, is one of the few times of the day where students can talk.

D.2 Not nessecarely, if you are in a bad mood swing, nothing can calm you down

D.3 Again, not nessecarely, if the parent and kid are in a good mood, it makes the parent not suffer (ex. winning a game, vacation, ect.)
imabench

Con

I request that people give conduct to the pro for being a good sport despite my shenanigans.

1) Teens will respond negatively to ANY kind of punishment used, not just silent lunches

Well we both actually agree that no matter what kind of a punishment is used, teenagers will always become rebellious and act out because of it.

2) Silent Lunches give bad energy to students who use lunch to unwind

So apparently there was only 1 fight that happened, and it cant necessarily be 100% caused by silent lunches. (My guess is that someone said something about the other persons mother's weight and it escalated from there)

As for the communication argument (Students use lunch to socialize) Kids only ever talk about gossip in high school and the Pro responded by saying that he doesnt have anyone elses phone numbers and thus cant communicate with them. While Im sure he is telling the truth, just because he cant text anyone doesnt mean that nobody else in school cant text each other either. Hell whenever Im in class kids just texted each other when class was about to start or end.... There are other ways to communicate and even though lunch is the primary means of communicating, it still isnt the only one.

3) Silent lunches cause more trouble

I think the Pro's argument here is that students burn off energy during lunch that they then wouldnt burn off anywhere else, but there are activities in school that allow people to burn off energy besides lunch including PE classes or any kind of club....

4) Hard to calm down teenagers

The negative energy argument comes up here again but not all negative energy is caused just by not being able to socialize. Teenagers could act negative because they bombed a test and they know it, because they forgot to turn in homework, because they accidentally spilled something all over themselves, or because that fat b*tch Mandy kissed Jacob even though he is clearly going out with Emily and Jacob is acting like he did nothing wrong but what dumba** mother f*cker would cheat on his own girlfriend and act like nothing happened??

Point is, teenagers get negative energy from a LOT of stuff, not just from school lunches.

==========================================================================

I hope I have argued that silent lunches are not the worst form of punishment for students to be subjected to compared to making them shower at Penn Sate. I thank the Pro for a fun debate and now I will go to sleep because its 2:30 AM
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by hghppjfan 4 years ago
hghppjfan
The con would be saying that silent lunches are good.
Posted by lannan13 4 years ago
lannan13
What do you mean by silent lunches? What would Con be defending
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by darkkermit 4 years ago
darkkermit
hghppjfanimabenchTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO made a good case. I had a hard time believing the holocaust was worse than silent lunching. But what really got me was the women's rights issue, which far beats silent lunches.
Vote Placed by igaryoak 4 years ago
igaryoak
hghppjfanimabenchTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro responded well to Con's hilarious shenanigans, but Con was able to successfully refute Pro's points.
Vote Placed by larztheloser 4 years ago
larztheloser
hghppjfanimabenchTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had BOP. Pro proved that silent lunches were a really, really bad thing to happen, but not the worst thing to happen. To prove that something is the "best" or "worse" you would normally have to make claims about it relative to something else, and I wasn't sure what that something else was in this debate. Nice try though. Clear con win.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
hghppjfanimabenchTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: All in all, I think Con showed that silent lunches weren't irredeemably horrible as punishments, and that any punishment could cause rebellion.