That public schools should enforce uniforms
Debate Rounds (4)
Enforce: to enact a mandate.
Should: Moraly or logicly right.
Also the affirmative has the burden of proving how enforcing uniforms is benifitial on balance.
Cont 1: Uniforms will affect the education of the poor.
When asking for students to dress a certain way in order for them to attend that school would definately hurt the poor. Education might be hurt or even loss due to the fact that money is a big problem. The negative believes that everyone should be given the opportunity to learn regardless of how they look,dress, or even how rich or poor they are.
Cont 2: Uniforms restrics and decreases freedom.
In school we are not allowed to retain some of our basic rights such as the freedom of speech or press ect.. If we enforce uniforms, surely we are taking away the freedom of creativity. Some people dress how they feel, or what they belive in. Some dress for a special someone or to enact what has happend to them. Its like adjusting what you wear to who you are.
Cont 3: Uniforms go agaisnt the idea of diversity.
When switching to uniforms we are reliving the past. We wanted only one race to rule: the whites. (KKK). When switching to uniforms, we first would need someone to decide what the uniform should be. When that person decides what the uniform is,then he enacts it. This is wrong for two reasons. First, the person who decides would have too much power on his hands. Second, the person who enacts the decided uniforms is saying that his decision is right and no other forms of clothing may be chosen.
Cont 4: Uniforms do not solve our current problems.
Some might say that enacting uniforms would help prevent discrimination by clothing and other such. Thats not true because some decide to alter the uniforms by either slight effects or major ones. Uniforms itself is a style so yes, judging still happens.
For these four reasons i urge a negative vote.
I will attack his case and then go on to my own.
Uniforms will affect the education of the poor. In fact, uniforms are equalizing the economic status in the school. If one kid is rich and has a nice shirt, this could be harmful to a kid who is poor and has a worse shirt. The fact is that no uniforms are putting schools in social classes.
Uniforms restrics and decreases freedom. Lawyers, waiters, chefs, cashiers have uniforms. Is this a decrease in freedom? Is anything a decrease in freedom? Is a ice cream parlor not having the king of ice cream you like a decrease in freedom. In the world around us there is always a decrease in freedom in everything.
Uniforms go agaisnt the idea of diversity. Is choosing the outfit that employees wear at Taco Bell racist? First of all, the KKK did not decide kid's uniforms. Choosing a outfit is not power. Its an easy decision. Usually the uniforms have many options.
Uniforms do not solve our current problems.
Uniforms are strictly enforced. Everyone has the same type of clothing.
Now on to my case
Cont. 1 Uniforms solve for diversity.
In the 1960's we went from hugging our classmates to shooting our classmates. That was the same time we went from uniforms to casual attire. The fact is that clothes are distinctive and they can cause racial and economical stereotypes.
(Cont 1) The argument my opponent states against my first contention is irrelevant. Sure, we would look the same, but my contention one is that people who cant afford these uniforms would not be able to get any (maybe a little) education. My opponent states that uniforms the economic status, that is in no way true. Uniforms affect your education and how you look while you receive it. In the case of the rich kid and poor kid, It goes beyond clothing. The rich kids would undoubtedly be in private schools instead of public. Our problems of discrimination always exists. The rich goes to private schools, colleges, ect. Uniforms would not make us economically equal.
(Cont 2) The only argument against my second contention is that workers,lawyers,chefs and other jobs require uniforms. I concede to the point that yes those jobs with the uniform rules are a decrease in freedom. However,
we all have the choice to work at those jobs or not. We accept the job knowingly that we will have to wear uniforms.
Whereas, in school we are required to attend whether or not we wear uniforms or not. We have the choice or not whether or not to buy the ice cream (that my opponent stated) knowing that some freedom will be lost.
(Cont 3)Okay, to address the racist issue, the definition of being racist is saying that your race is superior or that another race is inferior. Never did I say that the kkk decided the kids uniforms, but that they did not want diversity. My opponent never really addresses the diversity issue but states that "Usually the uniforms have many options". When some one decides your choices for ex. you have the choice between red, black, and green but only those 3; that is not diversity nor is it much freedom.(Linking to my cont 2) To address the argument stating that uniforms do not represent power. That is not true. Look at the Nazis, they wear their uniforms to represent Hitler and promote his power. Uniforms are symbols representing the power they were chosen by.
(Cont 4) Ok first off my opponent contradicts himself when he states that everyone has the same type of clothing but on his attack on my Contention 3 he's stating that uniforms have many options. He states that the uniforms are strictly enforced. AGAIN, it doesn't solve our problems and by STRICTLY enforcing uniforms there will undoubtedly be some type of resistance causing other problems.
Now on to my opponent's case
(Cont 1) I would like to point out the logical fallacy in his contention one. There is no way you can link shootings to uniforms. And the negative has already pointed out that uniforms would not solve for diversity due to the facts the rich would still go to private schools and that itself is already a form of stereotype. My opponent states that our current clothes cause racial stereotypes. But take into fact that to others it might be a racial stereotypes, I call it a culture and tradition.
(P.S) I urge a neg vote.
redsoxfreak010 forfeited this round.
(Cont 1) Again No matter how you see it, discrimination exist.
Uniforms not only doesnt solve the matter but it has a possibility of causing more problems.
(Cont 2) School is something required by law to attend, work isnt. We have to attend a certain number of years in these schools no matter what. You knowingly accept these uniformed required jobs when you accept the interview or position.
(Cont 3) Uniforms represent the power they are chosen by. If taco bell states that all employees must wear a black shirt with blue pants thats there uniform. That uniform represents taco bell and the power and influence it holds.
So yes, Uniforms does support the power it is chosen by.
And my opponent drops all other attacks and defends so thats why you should vote con.
In my school there are rich kids and poor kids. My opponent doesnt understand the fact that casual wear is discriminating no matter what. Even if one kid is offended.
Taco Bell is not known for their uniforms. Uniforms don't carry power. The nazi's were not known for their uniforms. They were known for killing millions of people. My opponent neglects the power of casual wear. We all have stereotypes for clothing. This affects the person wearing them like or not. Personally, I have been made fun of because of my clothes. When we neglect uniforms we neglect equality. People have killed themselves because of people making fun of their clothes. Its not their fault if they can't afford it. Why should we put kids through hell in order to have some freedom. I agree with freedom. But freedom has the purpose fufill happiness. Since, this is'nt happening, I can only see a vote for pro.
(In my school there are rich kids and poor kids. My opponent doesn't understand the fact that casual wear is discriminating no matter what. Even if one kid is offended)
I agree, casual wear is somewhat discriminating. But as I stated before, discrimination will always exist and uniforms will not fix that problem. Yes some public schools have rich and poor kids, but what the negative is trying to state is that as long as private schools exists so will the discrimination between the rich and poor.
(Taco Bell is not known for their uniforms. Uniforms don't carry power. The Nazi's were not known for their uniforms. They were known for killing millions of people. My opponent neglects the power of casual wear. We all have stereotypes for clothing. )
Ok Taco bell was an example of IF they had uniforms but as you stated, other stores wear uniforms swell. Uniforms do carry power because they represent the authority that chose it. True, the Nazi were remembered for their killing but also the uniforms. Just take for example the cross they bore on their right arm. Whenever we see that cross we think of the Nazi's and Hitler. And again yes stereo types will exist within casual wear but it will always exist.
(Personally, I have been made fun of because of my clothes. When we neglect uniforms we neglect equality. People have killed themselves because of people making fun of their clothes. Its not their fault if they can't afford it. Why should we put kids through hell in order to have some freedom. I agree with freedom. But freedom has the purpose fulfill happiness.)
When we neglect uniform we do not neglect equality because how can you achieve equality by FORCING uniforms on to people that's supposedly going to stop stereo types. When we neglect casual wear, we neglect culture, freedom, creativity. What you don't understand is that if you do enforce uniforms, people cant afford it and will obviously do something desperate to get it leading to more problems.
Because uniforms do not solve stereotypes or any other problems, I urge a Con vote.
What you don't understand is that if you do enforce uniforms, people cant afford it and will obviously do something desperate to get it leading to more problems.
What I understand is uniforms are designed to be cheap. To solve the economic problem. That was the main point of uniforms.
True, the Nazi were remembered for their killing but also the uniforms. Just take for example the cross they bore on their right arm. Whenever we see that cross we think of the Nazi's and Hitler. So, we should take away military uniforms because they entitle too much power?
When we neglect uniform we do not neglect equality because how can you achieve equality by FORCING uniforms on to people that's supposedly going to stop stereo types.
Voting rights for blacks were forced upon people. Is that a lack of freedom?
Uniforms do carry power because they represent the authority that chose it.
So, Taco Bell is going to take over the world because of their uniforms. When I walk into Taco Bell, I don't think that the uniforms are a sign of evil. It's organized.
My opponents rebuttals are based on that uniforms are designed to destroy freedom. Uniforms are used everyday at work. Why? To represent unity. Not evil.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by redsoxfreak010 7 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
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.