The Instigator
why_why
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
smlburridge
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

do we need more rights in school?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
why_why
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 522 times Debate No: 65502
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

why_why

Pro

I believe that our rights are limited in school. And I'll tell you from personal experiences. Dress codes are too strict. Once I was wearing short shorts, and by that I mean they were short. It was hot that day. So I was sent home and I missed my morning classes, because it would be disrupting others. So I had to miss math (a subject I need to work on as much as possible) and a test for my shorts???? Also, other schools use uniforms. I'd like to talk about something I remember reading on Scholastic magazine: a girl was wearing a white shirt with a pink heart instead of her uniform. She had to stay in the office all day. A boy wore a fohawk and wasn't allowed to go to school until he got a hair cut. This all violates freedom of expression.
Also, what about freedom of speech? I've seen it happen, a group of kids were starting s petition about us being forced to go outside for recess when it's cold, they got in trouble. We aren't allowed to pray, talk about our sexual orientations (in a non bullying way), or religion, etc.
The school is controlling over all. We aren't allowed to have 2 orange juices. Orange juice! It's healthy but the school must be in control. We must stand outside in the morning before class unless it's raining, snowing, or under 40"F.
smlburridge

Con

To my knowledge, public schools do not wear uniforms in the United States anymore. However, private schools do. Private schools are entirely different, because you (or your parents) are willingly purchasing your "education", and part of that contractual agreement requires a uniform. Short shorts, those that ride very high up and over the knee, are in many school districts prohibited. And why would you wear them anyway? I've never seen it get hot enough that you need short shorts. You need to go buy a new pair of normal shorts if you don't have any.

You willingly consent your rights as soon as you enter the building. It's part of what going to school legally entails. There is no "freedom of speech" or "freedom of religion" in school. Talking about sexual orientation or religion may be inappropriate or offensive to some, no matter what connotation you thought it had.

I can't say anything about orange juice, or standing outside in the morning, but 40 degrees Fahrenheit isn't cold.
Debate Round No. 1
why_why

Pro

I'm going to quote someone from the argument I mentioned, someone who works on government. "You don't sshdppb your constitutional rights when you enter school." And should something be totally not allowed because people are offended by it? In that case, girls should not go to school because some people are offended by it. That women should not be equal to men because people are offended by it. We should illegalize tattoos because some people are offended by it. And 40" may not seem cold to you, but it is to some people. Just as I'm comfortable in 90 degree weather, and my friend is comfortable in 20 degree weather. There is no logical reason a private school should require uniforms.
smlburridge

Con

And this someone who works in the government is? If you could give me their name and credentials, I'd accept that quote. But since you have failed to provide this evidence I still maintain my position. The school environment is for education, not distraction. Things that are offensive are distractions. In my state it is illegal to get a tattoo under the age of 18. Being offending by the sight of women is not as offensive as ignorant conversations on religion or sexual orientation could be, and these discussions can easily escalate into violence.

Uniforms in a private school provide an equal playing field mentality, and it emphasizes everyone is equal and deserves to have their opinion heard. Plus, you don't have to worry about what to wear each day, and it distinguishes you from others on field trips to help prevent lost kids. Uniforms traditionally also are a symbol of school pride, just as sports jerseys are.
Debate Round No. 2
why_why

Pro

Most uniforms are just something simple, it doesn't have your school's name on it, so it can't be a spirit thing. What you said about field trips is true, but chaperones are another good way. Also, not all conversations on religion or sexual orientations are "ignorant" it could reduce bullying. If a Muslim explains beliefs and his/her religion to a peer unsure if Muslims are terrorists or not, she can prove them she is not a terrorist. Or what if they are coming out of the closet?
Some more rights being deprived of is the right to use the toilet when we have to! This is a serious issue! It may seem like I'm over exaggerating but: your bladder can burst, you could get a kidney stone, and more. When a teacher wouldn't let me use the bathroom because it was silent reading, I almost peed my pants, I knew it was about to happen, so I ran out the door and got in trouble for it!
The assumption that children should sit and listen has been repeatedly disproved by scientists, psychologists, and educators. Children learn from experience. Think: what teaches you not to touch a heated stove? Your mom telling you it'll hurt, or burning your finger? Students are constantly being shamed for adapting diffirent styles. Kids who learn slower or faster are ignored. Teachers constantly pick faverotes. Children can't get water from the water fountain at certain times. What happened to free will, and it's hard to concentrate on your work when you are thirsty.
This is where I got that information: http://www.educationrevolution.org...
It's also not fair children who defend themselves from being physically bullied get in trouble. Parents, what would you rather have happen to your child: Get injuries from a kid because they didn't defend themselves, or they get detention.
smlburridge

Con

smlburridge forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
why_why

Pro

I'm gonna add some info: have you heard of that "pay to potty" story. You can see it here:
http://www.syracuse.com...
I could compare this to reasons why workers strike, in factories such as The Triangle Shirt waist factory, would not let workers use the bathroom, or would rush them.
A teacher forced a kid to pee in a cup:
http://thestir.cafemom.com...
let me talk about psychological issues that could result in that. Of course that is absolutely humiliating, and she could be afraid to go to school the next day, get bullied, be afraid of showing her body or asking to use the restroom again, etc.
Here is something else absolutely outrages:
http://www.bizpacreview.com...
this is horrible. We have lunch for a reason, food is the most important survival need, when someone is hungry they can't focus on any activity other then getting food. How should you expect any 5-10 year old to focus on math or other subject without lunch. Milk and fruit isn't nearly enough. And what a waste of food, there are starving children in Africa people! Let's also consider the possibilities why they couldn't afford lunch: they could be poor, and barely have money for what they have!
A follow up: http://www.addictinginfo.org...
I can compare this with welfare and food banks, adults sign up for welfare because they can't support themselves, imagine the goverment just decided to stop it. Many people would die. Of starvation, dehydration, Coldness, etc. When a child needs to get free lunch they should get it. They shouldn't be humiliated because of something that isn't their fault.
smlburridge

Con

Pardon my forfeit.

Your first article is, well, 1) the kid's fault for purchasing "homework passes" with play money instead of bathroom passes (irresponsibility) and 2) is the case of a single teacher, in a single school, out of hundreds of thousands of students and teachers. Your cases are anecdotal. You cannot say that every teacher denies their kids bathroom breaks. And no, we don't need free lunches. These kids still received a snack- fruit and milk. I agree, it should have been handled differently, but not even workers have the right to free lunches. Not even the common worker.
Debate Round No. 4
why_why

Pro

The thing is, we still need to be tolerant of a student's body needs.
Are you justifying this sort of behavior, it happens many places. Food is a survival need, as is using the bathroom. It should be respected, and everyone should get it.
Some rights from the constitution I could give a continues example of are:
First ammendment; religion is not respected at school. Teachers do little to nothing to stop bullying towards kids of religions frowned at (muslim, islam) and even in a way join it by letting it happen. Children aren't even allowed to pray, in a news story once you may have heard of, a kid was silently reading his bible in silent reading, and the teacher told him not to read it and made him put it on her desk. I've already given you examples of how freedom of speech is taken away.
The third ammendment says that no soldier shall be in any ones house without the owner's permission. I can compare this to teachers searching student's items without permission. Of course this isn't the same thing, but that is what it reminded me of.
I'm sorry I couldn't list them all but the source I was using to find the aammendments had some stupid pop up you couldn't ex out of and was trying to force me to buy something.
smlburridge

Con

Seeing as this is the last argument, I'd just like to say thanks to my opponent. They have actually tried to provide evidence, unlike some others I've debated against. On to the rebuttals:

1) The cases you have cited are anecdotal. If it happens in many places, why don't we see more lawsuits or actual statistics on the subject? The specific cases you cited are also special, and have extraneous circumstances that must be considered.

2) If religion is, as you claim, not respected in school, then these schools are in violation of the students' individual rights. This can be found in the Lemon test from the Supreme Court Case Lemon vs. Kurtzman (1971): 1. state or school-sponsored activities must have a secular purpose 2. must *neither* advance nor inhibit religion 3. must not result in a excessive entanglement between government and religion.

This may seem like a backward explanation, but I would like to reiterate to the audience that the opponent's resolution is should we have *more* rights in school, not rights already guaranteed to us by the United States Constitution. When schools violate these rights, they are perfectly viable to being sued. And they have been, in many cases. But do we need more "rights" in school? No.

The third amendment does not even nearly relate here. When you enter schools, you consent to their policies regarding bag searches, locker searches, cellphone restrictions, etc. These schools aren't guilty of larceny or theft unless they keep the confiscated material permanently.

Thank you for your time, and I urge you vote against this resolution.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by gomergcc 2 years ago
gomergcc
why_whysmlburridgeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:61 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did make a good argument. Con failed to really address the issue in there arguments. Con cited no sources.