The Instigator
DawsonBruno
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
CommunistDog
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

The Confederate flag should be illegal and should be eradicated from all flags.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
CommunistDog
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/7/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,049 times Debate No: 73052
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (2)

 

DawsonBruno

Con

I believe that the Confederate flag should be allowed to be used on a flag or worn on clothing. The people who wear it do not know what it means and are ignorant of the history of slavery. The states with the Flag on their flag is about history, not about being Pro-slavery. They show it as a sign of getting through the past and showing what they've been through.
CommunistDog

Pro

The war was based on "saving" the Southerners' economy. By economy, they meant the usage of slave labor. During the Industrial Age, there was a larger competition of agricultural goods. Farmers needed more slave labor to keep their farms running. After the cry to free all slaves was heard, the South said that they would leave the U.S. if they deemed slave labor illegal nationwide. So then, the war began. It was the Confederates against the Union. Family members with different opinions would face off, they might have even killed each other over it.
Debate Round No. 1
DawsonBruno

Con

For this argument, I could go either way. Pro, I could say that the Confederate flag is offensive to 13% of America. Which is all the non-whites. They were all tried as slaves, but Africans were the best choice. I am doing this for a school project and I am neutral. If I were con, I would go on and say that it is a historical artifact and should be able to stay on all the flags.
The middle school dress code provides: "Generally, student dress is considered appropriate as long as it does not distract others, interfere with the instructional programs, or otherwise cause disruption." The policy also cited some examples of clothing "judged to be inappropriate or distracting in the educational setting," such as "clothing that displays profane language, drugs, tobacco, or alcohol advertisements, sexual innuendoes or anything else deemed to be offensive." The dress code at Candice"s high school states: "Dress is casual, but some styles, which may be appropriate outside of school, are clearly inappropriate for school. Students may not wear the following: . . . Shirts with obscene/derogatory sayings."

Latta is a town of about 1400 people. The Latta School District has a student population of approximately 1600 students, almost equally divided between white and African-Americans. The racial history in Latta, including various racial incidents among students, served as justification for the defendants" actions and was important to the court"s decision. "For generations before integration in the 1970-71 school year, whites and African-Americans in Latta had "lived culturally and financially separate [lives]," and integration "made life in [Latta] drastically different." Although school officials have recognized an improvement in race relations since integration, they also stated that "there has always been, and continues to be, an underlying, mostly unspoken, prejudice between [Latta"s] white and black students." " (quoting record testimony). The record further contained evidence of several racial incidents occurring in Latta schools, from the mid-1980R42;s to the most recent in 2009, when a student told another student who was wearing a Confederate flag belt buckle, "If you don"t take that belt off, we"re going to take it off of you."

Candice and her parents communicated to the Latta School District (LSD) in attempts to have them change their dress codes. When those efforts failed, they filed a Section 1983 suit in federal district court in South Carolina in 2006 against LSD claiming: "her First Amendment right to free speech and expression was violated because she was not allowed to wear the Confederate flag shirts or protest shirts; her Fourteenth Amendment right to due process was violated because the schools" dress codes are overbroad and vague; and her Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection was violated because the school officials specifically targeted her Confederate flag shirts while not punishing other racially themed shirts." The LSD and Candice"s middle school principal and high school principal were named as defendants.

In 2009, the district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, and Candice appealed. In an unpublished opinion, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case because the district court decision only addressed the Confederate flag shirts, not the protest shirts that did not bear the Confederate flag. On remand, the district court granted summary judgment to the defendants on all claims, and Candice again appealed.

Ruling/Rationale: The Fourth Circuit panel unanimously affirmed the lower court"s decision. It concluded that "the school officials complied with the requirements for regulating student speech as established in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)," and held that the school dress codes and their enforcement did not violate the Due Process Clause or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The panel began its opinion with an analysis of Candice"s free speech claim to wear the Confederate flag shirts and the protest shirts. Within this claim, Candice also asserted that the Confederate flag shirts were symbols of her heritage and religious faith. The court concluded that each of the shirts was to be considered under the Tinker standard, which established the basic framework governing student speech: That school officials may prohibit or punish student speech that would materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school or collide with the rights of others. School officials may regulate such speech even before it occurs, as long as they can point to facts which might reasonably have led them to forecast such a disruption.

This is an outrage. Who cares. It is a shirt. They did not mean anything by it!
CommunistDog

Pro

The Confederate flag holds a meaning that many feel is offensive. Many claim that it was because of history, but you cannot avoid the fact that the biggest reason the war started because the southern economy was crumbling to bits because there were less slaves.
Debate Round No. 2
DawsonBruno

Con

So you think just because it is offensive to some people, not even close to a majority, that we should take away peoples rights and not let them express what they want?
CommunistDog

Pro

Are you implying that you think the African American population is a minority with little contribution to the workings of America?
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by asi14 1 year ago
asi14
DawsonBruno don't plagiarize. Ever.
Posted by DawsonBruno 2 years ago
DawsonBruno
Explain?
Posted by CommunistDog 2 years ago
CommunistDog
Well... I meant in other ways.
Posted by DawsonBruno 2 years ago
DawsonBruno
Peacefully? They take reasoning( the death of Michael Brown) to loot stores, shoot people, and break laws. How is that peaceful rioting?
Posted by CommunistDog 2 years ago
CommunistDog
Yes. The African American population has also been rioting (PEACEFULLY) for rights too.
Posted by DawsonBruno 2 years ago
DawsonBruno
Be honest. If the white population were being offended by something, do you think something would have happened by now?
Posted by CommunistDog 2 years ago
CommunistDog
They aren't important enough..? O_O
Posted by DawsonBruno 2 years ago
DawsonBruno
not at all. I am saying that they aren't important enough to take the rights away from the entire United States.
Posted by DawsonBruno 2 years ago
DawsonBruno
I mean that the states who have a Confederate flag on their flag, do not mean it as a pro slavery sign. They use it to show their history and what they've been through. I am not pro-slavery, but I do not believe that the Confederate flag, now, means anything, but history.
Posted by Laupppaige 2 years ago
Laupppaige
Hey dawson!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by asi14 1 year ago
asi14
DawsonBrunoCommunistDogTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Both sides, there should be more evidence (This was a part of the RFD, by the way). Arguments should be developed more. Specifics: Con: Why did you plagiarize your second round? Not only was it untopical to the rest of the debate, it's just a bad thing to do. You barely developed much of a case in your opening speech, and you kind of ditch it in the last round. I have nothing good to say; your plagiarism killed your ethos. Good going. Pro: I would have liked more developed case attacks, but that didn't matter much given the con's plagiarism. Aside from that, I generally agreed with your arguments. RFD: Plagiarism on the part of the con: http://legalclips.nsba.org/2013/04/04/federal-appeals-court-upholds-school-ban-on-confederate-flag-and-other-protest-shirts/
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 2 years ago
salam.morcos
DawsonBrunoCommunistDogTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't even debate. Con did a better job debating on behalf of Pro. I vote Con.