The Instigator
lorene13
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Kylie.Cunningham
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

no school

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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...
Kylie.Cunningham
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/13/2017 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 419 times Debate No: 100883
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

lorene13

Con

i thank that there should be no school. the reason why i thank this is because the parents can teach the students. i thank that the parents should be able to have a choice whether to send there child to school or not. its no right that the parents have to send there child to school. every person should have freedom and making parents send there child to school is not giving freedom at all. nobody should be made to do anything. and when there is school your not aloud to wear certain clothes.
Kylie.Cunningham

Pro

The parents have work, they need to work to get money and to support the kids. Public school are free and homeschooling the kids are more than public schools. When are they going to be able to teach the kids if they have to work the whole day?
Debate Round No. 1
lorene13

Con

well your right but have you ever thought that one parent could work while the other teaches there kid.
Kylie.Cunningham

Pro

But what if the parent who is working gets laid off or fired? Then the other one has to get a job.
Debate Round No. 2
lorene13

Con

then the parent that got laid off or fired can teach the kid while the other one works.
Kylie.Cunningham

Pro

They need to be able to buy the books, supplies , etc to be able to teach them.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Lucy.Mair 1 year ago
Lucy.Mair
What about single parents? They would have to work and there would be nobody at home all day to look after the kids because the parent needs money to provide for the child/ren. Also, who would be looking after the child/ren during the day for school wouldn't be available to take care of children all day.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 year ago
GrimlyF
CON. What if both parents work? Who pays for books and supplies? Who, among the parents, has the ability to teach and control a class? How will you feed them? Will you build multiple bathrooms? Where will the students play/ practise sports or change their clothes?
Posted by Masterful 1 year ago
Masterful
We are a social species and as such we need to mix with other people. Keeping a kid at home all day is bad for them because they will not develop socially. School can be tough, but kids need to learn to deal with hardships or they won"t function very well in the real world. It"s also very unlikely that your parents are qualified to teach the current curriculum.
Posted by lorene13 1 year ago
lorene13
your right but have you ever thought that one parent could work while the other teaches there child.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SkySky16 1 year ago
SkySky16
lorene13Kylie.CunninghamTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Nether showed much complexity, but I ultimately chose Pro. Not sure why con was advocating for the topic and pro was going against but that's beside the point. Pro made reasonable hypothetical arguments, that wouldn't have stood up against any real arguments by con's side, while con just stated their opinion and that's about all that happened in the debate.