The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Education should be Mandated in the United States of America

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/6/2018 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 791 times Debate No: 118844
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




As my first opponent on this point is proving unreliable and unsatisfying, I will challenge you directly. First Round is Acceptance and First Arguments. Logical Fallacies will not be permitted. As I have already made this debate once before, I'm just going to recycle my opening arguments.

The United States was formed on the basis of the philosophy of the likes of John Locke, William Blackstone, And Adam Smith. Namely, That the people and the Individual is far more intelligent and important than the greater whole of society and its contract. This is especially true in the case of the management of familial and community units. However, These ideas are falling by the wayside. Nowhere is this more felt than in our public school system.
Every human being has a right to an education. The government has seen fit to interpret this as meaning that every human MUST be forced to get a government provided education. There have been few tragedies that fly as directly into the face of our principles as this abomination. First, The government is abusing a system meant to help those with fewer resources. The public school system was never meant to be the main source of education in America. It was meant to supply poor families with a more affordable option. The rest of the schools were built and operated privately, By those wishing to progress the human race. However, Over time, The government began to create and enforce more regulations upon the curriculum of these schools, And the schools that were accepting public funds (which should never have happened in the first place) became dependent on the funds provided by the government, Which then dictated what could or could not be taught by these schools. This has lead to a population of government worshippers who believe that every problem the United States has faced has been solved by government, From slavery and racism to the great depression. This could not be less true, And is leading us down a very dark path of big government movements like the Socialist state dreams of Ocasio-Cortez and other campus radicals who have been brainwashed into believing the trash spouted by the government about such matters as the role of our Founding Fathers, Of Racism, And of the New Deal. One wonders why the products of our government run school system are supporting the growth of our government. They have been turned into Alinsky"s useful idiots, Serving the system they were trained to blindly follow and strengthen.
Secondly, This leads to the death of choice. Now, Every single American citizen is forced by law under penalty of fines and the Social Services to attend an educational course for "between 175 and 180 days of school and/or between 900 and 1, 000 hours of instructional time per year, Depending on the grade level (Center For Public Education). " This is one of the most obvious examples of subjugation that has ever been present in the United States. With these mandates, The government is implying that they, As the "ruling body, " know what is best for the population and that they should therefore be able to force their ideas upon us. It"s disgusting, And is an obvious violation of the underlying and fundamental principles of the United States of America. There should certainly be trust in the ability of parents to choose what is best for their children, But this idea is being ridiculed and destroyed by the government. Why? Because, As said by Brutus in the Anti-federalist number one, "it is a truth confirmed by the unerring experience of ages, That every man, And every body of men, Invested with power, Are ever disposed to increase it, And to acquire a superiority over every thing that stands in their way. " This is also backed up by Abigail Adams in her assertion that "Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could, " in her Braintree letter to John Adams on March 31, 1776. The most well known statement of this type is "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely, " which was written by lord Acton.
There is an obvious solution to this problem. The Common Core government program must be overturned and replaced by independent and privatised schools. We must have faith that there will always be Individuals such as Benjamin Franklin and Abraham Lincoln, Who adhere to the principle of scholar empowered learning. Anyone who refuses to attend a school should have that choice, As those people exist now and are simply a drain on resources and serve as distractions to those scholars who are willing to learn. A choice based system would eliminate the need for internal the discipline issues of today"s school systems. This would also free Individuals from large taxes going toward indoctrination programs and drains such as those mentioned above. This system would force schools to compete for attendance like businesses, Ensuring that only the best would thrive, As the Free Market was meant to do.
Of course, This will lead to more uneducated members of society who refused to take the initiative of education. Those people exist now, Though. They go through the Public School System refusing to retain knowledge and acting as a drain on resources, Tax dollars, And time. A choice system would only make these people easier to notice.
One might also object that people would not be able to learn the difference between right and wrong, As is taught in Kindergarten and Elementary schools. However, With a choice system, Parents would still have the prerogative to teach right and wrong, Which would also be reinforced by church and normal social interactions. The parents who would not have that prerogative would be the same ones who don"t know either, Which would make no difference.
In the end, The only downsides are negated by the fact that they are also the pitfalls facing us now, Whereas the merits of this proposed system are self evident: increased freedom, Better education, And a sense of independence from the government which is healthy in a Free Society.

Works Cited
Gatto, John. "How Public Education Cripples Our Kids, And Why. " The Natural Child Project. Https://www. Naturalchild. Org/articles/guest/john_gatto2. Html. Accessed 15 October 2018.
"What is School Choice? " ed Choice. Https://www. Edchoice. Org/school-choice/what-is-school-choice/. Accessed 15 October 2018.
Hull, Jim. "Time in school: How does the U. S. Compare? " Center for Public Education. Http://www. Centerforpubliceducation. Org/research/time-school-how-does-us-compare. Accessed 15 October 2018.
Adams, Abigail. Letter to John Adams, Braintree March 31, 1776.
Brutus. Anti-Federalist Brutus I, October 18, 1787.
Lord Acton. Letter to Bishop Creighton, 1887.


Happy to think with you today,

We can agree that Individualism was a big part of the thinking of the Founding Fathers. However, Technology, Science, And our understanding of reality has improved enough to where we know individuals can only thrive under the right conditions. Keeping the balance of power between individuals and the collective is extremely important, But as far as the issue we have come together to discuss goes, A basic education is the foundation for both society and the individual. Education in some form absolutely must be mandated. I will put out an idea or two, Talk of your points, And return the torch to you.

1. Children must be protected from their Parents.

If we stop mandated education, What we are really doing is allowing children to be belongings, Or the indoctrinated pets of their parents forever. Religious parents indoctrinate children to believe all that they do. You can take Islam and child soldiers of Africa as examples. What if these children were given an education that taught them to think critically and analyze even their deepest held beliefs?

Children do not belong to their parents. They are not slaves. It is part of the reason I am against homeschooling. There are plenty of parents who do it well, But their own biases too often slip in. A parent's role is to help bring up their children in the best manner. It is a ridiculous notion that parents will be able to teach every subject as well as a qualified teacher in each field. It is ridiculous to think that an individual knows best how to teach lessons, Not the people who have gone through the research in these fields.

One can argue that the school system can be improved, But not that each individual parent is capable of teaching as well as educators. I am a musician and string teacher for over a decade. No private individual without a decade of training could pray to understand how to teach like I can.

2. The Public School System

In the US, Our public school systems are largely underfunded. Many of the schools have sections that are actually dangerous for the children. If we are going to have public schools, We should be obligated to fund them. Republicans and Democrats both are actively failing at this role. The way the current system is set up, Property taxes in each area fund the schools there. This is a problem. All rich people move to the same districts, And all poor people are left with underfunded schools. If you have been to a rich area's school and a poor area's, This difference is easily noted.

Poor children are the ones who truly pay this difference. Public School, Or education in general, Is supposed to be the great equalizer. No matter who your parents are, You can get an education and if you try hard enough you will have at least a chance to make a great life for yourself. The education system is failing poor children to give them anywhere near the same opportunity. Naturally, Rich parents will be able to pay for better education for their children through various means, But that does not mean public schools should add to that disparity.

We can all agree that the public school system in the USA is garbage, But the solution is not to throw it out of the window and allow children no opportunities to succeed simply because some children do not grab those opportunities full-heartedly.

In the future you present, We allow children to fail. We allow parents to chose that they do not get an education. Literacy rates decline, Children lose their futures, The work force of the US deteriorates in proficiency, Et cetera. All to prove a slight improvement in education for the ones who are allowed to attend. This does not guarantee that they put their all into it.

The focus should be on improving education, Not removing the mandate. Parents who don't think education is necessary for their children are likely the reason the mandate has to exist at all. If your beliefs and worldview that you teach your children can't withstand the rigors of a public education, Then it is far too frail to exist in the first place. Individuals can only be themselves once they understand all that exists within our society. The should be subjected to experiences of as many subjects as possible so they can find what they love. A simple existence in one town will not teach them all the world has to offer.

We can agree that the mandate requires too much time. The many years of public education is not necessary. I can take a student from beginner to professional in just a handful of years. The system should be amended and improved. That doesn't change that education should absolutely be mandated with the current state of the world.

Now for some of your points.

1. "The public school system was never meant to be the main source of education in America. " et al

The public school system is still the option for poor families. It provides both an education and free childcare. If their children were not in public school, They would be either at home possibly alone, Or the parents would have to pay for childcare.

Private schools and homeschooling are still options. Parenting is still an option. The mandate of certain number of hours matters little if you do homeschooling and they pass the proper tests.

Educators should be able to say what is and is not taught in schools. Homeopathy, Astrology, Creationism, Religion, Et cetera has no place in schools.

2. "Government Worshippers/Indoctrinations"

I'll need a specific example of how education forces people to worship government. It is true that the more educated one gets the more left-leaning they tend to be, For a variety of reasons. We can go into economics arguments if you'd like on specific topics, But that would seem to be a distraction from the topic at hand.

Slavery was a problem that was allowed to exist by the forefathers of the US and by concurrent generations of government until it was quashed by the people, Not by government specifically, Though government was the trigger, And the government can be blamed in large part for allowing it to begin with, Or for not addressing it sooner. No one I've heard gives government all the credit for this. Racism is the same, And it's still a problem that can't be solved by government, But by education and self-realization that racism is a ridiculous notion.

The Great Depression could be said to have been caused in part by the government and solved in part by the government. I have no idea how you think the school systems force people to think the government deserves full credit for these things. Classes I've been in have denigrated our government. Not to the extent it should be perhaps, But it nonetheless never put me in a position where I was in love with government.

3. "Socialist Dreams"

Education is good for this as well. Socialism has not worked in the past. Education can show this. Further economic education can suggest that a mixed economy works better than pure capitalism or pure socialism. In reality, Pure capitalism and pure socialism have both never been tried. But that again is more of an economic discussion than a discussion involving an education mandate.

4. Government Knows Best

It isn't just "The Government" that decides these kind of things. It's the department of education. It's a collection, Ideally, Of real educators. What we have now is a partisan system where the president decides the leader of this. It's absurd. Betsy DeVos has no business being in lead of this with her nonexistent and in fact contradictory credentials. It's no wonder the education system is broken. The department should be a collection of educators voted on by educators.

Parents deserve no faith in being able to "know what is best for their children. " Their children are not their toys. Any random parent should be trusted no more than a random government official to "know what is best" for them. I apologize if this insults you. I believe it to be the case for myself.

If you know what is best, Then you should take what educators say and be incredibly involved in your child's education. Contextualize for them. Tell them your opinions. Let them be the judge. This is parenting.

There will always be parents who are not looking out for their child's best interest. Without the mandate, What opportunity does life hold for these children? Their parents will keep them uneducated, And they will remain in their house as slaves. As most children are to their parents.

Children do not know what is best for them. On this we agree. Parents largely do not know, And some do not care. Believe not in the public education system or the government, But in the educators. My priority as an instructor is to teach your children to think for themselves and I put them first always.

To conclude this round,

The system you propose is worlds worse for society as a whole and would lead to the downfall of America as an educated nation in a world that will progress without us. It would lead to children even more ignorant than they are now with no opportunity to be had, Which is innately worse than opportunity they had and failed at. Failing when given an opportunity can be a fire that fuels your next opportunity.

Parents and Governments can not be expected to know better than educators how to educate. Our system can be improved through a variety of means, But failing to give children an opportunity to be educated, Or allowing parents to opt out of education their children, Is to encourage slavery and to discourage individualism by not showing these children what the world has to offer and not teaching them alternative, Potentially better ways to explore the world around them.

The mandate must exist so parents aren't allowed to indoctrinate their children in such a way as to give the child no escape. They have plenty of opportunity to convince their child outside of school time as it stands now. The balance is kept.

May your thoughts be clear,

Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for your admirable conduct. I believe that this is a productive discourse. Now to the arguments.

I will begin with rebuttals

The parents are not the ones to fear (with exceptions). Of course, As with any given group of people, There are good and bad parents. However, As the family is the second base unit of our society, I would advocate that we should error on the side of trusting the parents to know what is best for their children infinitely better than a faceless bureaucrat. The reason for this is simple. That parents are acutely aware of what circumstances that they are under, What their child's personality and psychology is, What the worth of their child is, As well as a vast plethora of other factors that would be completely unknown to a person who's job it is to justify their idea of good and integrate it into the lives of thousands of children who are faceless and, For all purposes, Meaningless to them. As for bad parents, I will concede that there is a small group of parents who are not attempting to do the best for their children and instead indoctrinate them completely. Of course, If this be the goal of a person today, They would simply enter the home school program and do this anyway. In order to completely protect against this, You need to decry homeschooling as unlawful, Which is a violation of a parents right to choose the course of education for their child. If you were to ban homeschooling, What is preventing the parent from preemptively indoctrinating their children to discount the education that is received at public school. I refuse to believe, Too, That sharing your values with your children, As long as those views are not in favor of violating anybody else's Rights, Is a bad thing. As for the case of "enslaving children, " I will agree that there are children who are abused or improperly used in a way which violates their human rights, Which is why we have police, Although I disagree with the way our Social Services works. This also begs the question: If parents are forcing their opinions and indoctrinating their children with them, What are teachers doing? I will leave the case of the system already being set up as indoctrination for later, But you cannot really be telling me that a teacher's bias won't come out and won't influence a young and impressionable child just as much as a parent's will. Even if they are getting other signals at home, This can only serve to confuse them into apathy, Ideological shock, Or, Only slightly better and as I pointed out earlier, Force the child who is unable to reach independent ideas of any real substance, To choose between those of teachers or parents. I am not making the argument that homeschooling should be the only education available. I am saying that there should be no government regulations on the curriculum of private schools. Public schools should be one per every 50, 000 children, Because only the poorest should need to attend the public schools.

The public schools should be funded by taxes, As it is a human right and that is the only requisite for taxes. If they were rarer, Not as many taxes would be necessary. This money should be spread equally to all public schools, And should be the duty of state or city government. I never claimed that we should defund them or get rid of them completely. I simply said that mandatory attendance to these places which, Using your own words, Are "dangerous for the children. " This brings up another good point, Which is that many of these poor children are put in danger by dangerous criminals being who are forced to attend the same schools. If they were out of schools because they obviously have no desire to be there, Their crimes would at least be more obvious. If schools were, For the most part, Private enterprises, They would have to compete for attendance and, Therefore, Money from parents. This would give them a reason to improve and be better than the rest and continually improve. This would improve the school system. Many parents would also feel that real world experience could be more valuable than a school education and their children would get jobs at workplaces that would not feel pressured to hire educated people and pay better, Which would improve the work force by not only providing more time for people to work, But free up higher payed jobs for those who truly work for them and more blue collar jobs for those who don't work as hard.

Again, The public school should be skeletal, Not nonexistent. And again, Any private school would act as a place to leave your children as would apprenticeships, Internships, And jobs. The mandated government tests are a problem in that they assume that every child is the same in the way that they learn. The hours aren't the main problem the main problem is the curriculum, Which I will get to soon.

My points are as follows:

Free childcare is not a human right. Education is. Therefore, There should be an option to attend public school for those who cannot afford anything else. However, Childcare would be provided through any school, Apprenticeships, And jobs, As I said before. "Educators should be able to say what is and is not taught in schools. Homeopathy, Astrology, Creationism, Religion, Et cetera has no place in schools. " Why not? Not everybody agrees with your narrow worldview. Your "facts" are nothing more than opinions with few facts that you actually understand that are twisted to fit the assertions. Therefore, Schools should be allowed to teach whatever they want and parents should be allowed to decide which school they send their children so that they get an education which caters to them.

Secondly, Many schools to indeed indoctrinate children. An example would be the manipulation of history such as that of slavery. Your assertions that "Slavery was a problem that was allowed to exist by the forefathers of the US and by concurrent generations of government until it was quashed by the people" shows that you are a product of a biased source. The reason that our system demonizes the Founders is because they were (with the possible exception of Hamilton) against big government. Although some owned slaves, They were all opposed to the idea of slavery. The reason that they didn't get rid of their slaves were that Jefferson's were inherited and used as collateral on his farm. Washington's were freed at his death. Sam Addams was given a slave as a gift and refused it. They couldn't get rid of slavery (which was started by the Africans, Moved to the Portuguese, And then the English) was because doing so would lead to the South succeeding and the British being able to destroy all that they had worked for them. They put bans on slavery effective 20 years later and purposely put the "Created Equal" clause in because they knew that it was inconsistent and would soon lead to the destruction of slavery. I was also taught that the Founders were evil oppressors, But this could hardly be more false. My point was that it was ended by the people and not the government, Which you conceded to in your argument. Racism has never been inherent in the people, Only the big government supporting democrat KKK and Dixiecrats.

This is true in the fact that teaching the historical travesty of the 100 million people who died directly because of socialist governments in the 20th century should make people adverse to it. Why, Then, Do so many people accept it as acceptable now? It is because they are taught that all economic systems are equal. True socialism has been tried. The only ones who use that excuse are people who support socialism but wish to distance themselves from the Nazis and USSR.

Nobody should be given the responsibility to make the decisions for thousands of people. Get rid of the board of Education and localize education to improve it.

I addressed the issue of Parents versus bureaucrats above.

"If you know what is best, Then you should take what educators say and be incredibly involved in your child's education. Contextualize for them. Tell them your opinions. Let them be the judge. This is parenting. " This is parenting by Government while Parents are left to correct the information.

The system I propose is much better for society as a whole and would lead to the improvement of America as a Free and educated nation in a world that has not progressed without us since the beginning of our great nation. It would lead to children even more productive than they are now with more opportunity to be had, Which is innately better than opportunity they had and refused to take part of.

Governments and faceless "educators" can not be expected to know better than Parents how to educate. This is an Appeal to an Anonymous Authority. Our system can be improved through a variety of means, But giving children an opportunity to be educated, And allowing parents to opt out of education their children, Is to encourage Freedom and to discourage collectivism by showing these children what the world has to offer instead of the stifling and self absorbed world of academia.

The mandate must cease to exist so that the Government or educators aren't allowed to indoctrinate children in such a way as to give the child no escape.

Once again, Thank you for remaining civil.

In Liberty,


I return the thanks and the belief this is productive. I think there are too many claims in your post to address well in 10k characters, So I will address as many as I can sufficiently. If there were no limit I would address them all.

1. Prioritizing Parents and Indoctrination.

You are absolutely correct that teachers indoctrinate students as well. You are correct that this leads to a clash between the parent's ideology and the teacher's ideology. I agree too that parents need to have some say in the education of their children. Even in a utopian society, People would still likely have emotional attachments to offspring that they sire or birth. Being that we're debating in our current reality, I have to accept society functions best when parents have some control over their student's education. You also agree with me that parents do and are indoctrinating their children when they teach their thoughts, And they themselves feel or think that their ideology is the best.

With all of these agreed upon statements in mind, The middle ground, The compromise between the two stances is a mandated public school system.

No matter what, Instruction indoctrinates. Having competing viewpoints is the only defense against indoctrination. The stress involved with the choice between believing one's parents or one's teachers, Or even one's friends who learn a different ideology from their parents or teachers, Is a necessary stress. Neither of us would say that a life with no stress creates strong, Individualistic human beings capable of succeeding in life. This is a necessary stress.

Homeschooling alone would then be indoctrination from one side. I. E. No compromise at all. Homeschooling, With the mandate and tests required, Is a compromise that greatly favors the parents. Private schooling is nearly identical to homeschooling. The private school selected will more than likely be biased towards the parent's views, Limiting ideological diversity. This leads to less well-rounded children. Children who have have not had to question certain positions that a significant, If not majority of the population differs from their parents and their private instructors on.

I propose to you that the people can hold the teachers accountable if they push an extreme ideology, As many have been held accountable and fired for improper teaching. The public school we must strive to build needs to be above extreme ideology and give children only the tools required to think for themselves, Countering in some way the indoctrination of the parents on the child. In this respect, It should be an effort of all members of our society to disable bureaucrats from having any control over the Public School curriculum. Instead, It should be educators who make the curriculum.

Children are more likely to accept their parent's views even with our current system in place. This can be proven statistically through various means. I do have sources for this, But posting sources on this site is now a struggle. If you or the audience wish for me to supply them I'll be happy to do so but I believe this is not a controversial point.

So, In short, Your current view guarantees the parent's rights as strong as possible, Which is admirable to me. I contend that you put too little faith in the Public School System' efficacy at giving children the basic tools required to succeed, Even if we can both agree that it needs to be improved drastically (and can easily be, Given the state of education in other countries) I contend that you discount the importance of ideological diversity and its role in strengthening individuality for our children. I contend that you put too little value on the child's rights.

2. Public School Funding, Safety, And Strength of Workers.

We agree on taxes, The distribution of those taxes, And the duty of the government here. Some schools currently are dangerous places for students i. E. Poisoned water, Loose ceiling tiles, Nails sticking out of floors, Et cetera. This is an unequal funding issue which was my point. These structural insecurities are easily resolved with proper funding. This is certainly the government's fault currently. Few people run and mention these issues. This is not an argument against public schools as a concept, Just the execution in our current reality. There is less guarantee that the homes of some children are any safer.

"Dangerous criminals" are forced to attend the same schools. Please let's keep in mind we're talking about children here. If there is any chance to prevent children from becoming criminals it is in the public school system. Interactions with supportive adults go a long way to stopping more crime than we will ever know. There are abusive parents out there. More than we will ever likely know. I can count with the fingers on my left hand the friends I have had who were not stressed more than necessary or directly abused by their parents, And these aren't even intentional mistakes on the parent's part. Were y0ur parents perfect? Children who have committed crimes are not classified on the same level as adult criminals, Nor should they be. From where do you think their criminality arises? From the public schooling system, Built to educate, Support, And keep children safe, Or the reality outside the public school systems?

In what world can you say it is better for society that children who are neglected at home should stay at home?

Now, What better real world experience is there for children than experiencing delinquency on low levels in a relatively safe environment? People tend to make fun of parents who go overboard with concerns for 'safety' and end up weakening their children. These children are called 'sheltered. ' This term applies exceedingly well to home schooled and private schooled children. Parents will get air purifiers, Mask their children, Et cetera to prevent them from getting sick. This in turn leads their immune systems to develop less. This in turn makes them more prone to sicknesses for the rest of their life. Some parents put paddings all over their child when they go to ride a bike or skateboard. Other parents ban their children from those experiences altogether citing safety concerns.

If you value real world experience as you say, There are many experiences of value to be had in public schools. These lessons are extremely important, In my view, To be prepared for the real world outside of the parental shelter. This is called 'socializing' children. It is a known objectively important step for well-balanced children. It is a well-known problem for home schooled children. Home school parents try to mitigate this by exposing their children to other home schooled children with mixed results. Home schooled children grow up and what many of them will tell you after they are adults is that they lacked socialization and feel it is important for their children. What publicly schooled children will say is they love how smart home schooled or private schooled children are. There is not a reason both of these strengths cannot be merged with the public school system.

Neither you or I agree that schooling needs to last as long as it does. I would submit to you and our audience that children graduating high school at 18 today could be taught everything they have learned up to that point at a much earlier age. 13 is my opinion, At the very least. Some children have graduated college at far less of an age (I do have sources, Again). I propose that outside of mentally challenged situations this will be true. I can cite over a decade of teaching experience to this as well.

There is no question that better educated workers make for a stronger work force. Even if your specialization is narrow and focused, Cross pollination will help every field. A plumber or electrician without math or physics knowledge will lead to more cases of electrocution, Shoddy plumbing, And wiring.

3. Board of Education and Authority

You claim that homeopath, Astrology, Religion, Et cetera should have a place in schools because I, And the majority of scientists, Have "twisted facts. " You are making a claim that no facts can be known to exist. This is not true. To be frank homeopathy and astrology are taught in schools to some extent. The evidence in direct opposition to them, With no evidence for them makes your argument an appeal to ignorance when there is no ignorance on the subject. You're saying that my facts are not facts. If that is the case I can't help you, And I wish you the best. The parents are free to present their evidence to their children if they wish it. A federal board would say you cannot teach demonstrably false science as 'up for debate' science. To pretend it is not known. Splitting these choices among more than one Board means that arguments don't all lead to the same authority. Multiple boards will make multiple decisions when only one decision is factually true. Appealing to scientific fact is not an 'appeal to an anonymous authority. ' Science is not anonymous.

In conclusion:

We agree parents indoctrinate. We agree schools indoctrinate. Your position is that the parent's indoctrination is acceptable and the school's is not. If you have your way, The parents indoctrination will be unchallenged. The school's indoctrination will never be unchallenged by the parents unless it is perfectly of the same ideology, In which case you should have no issue with it.

Your conclusion at the end of R2 is that the educator's indoctrination would, And is currently, Going unopposed. Giving children no room for escape.

The reality is that the school is never unopposed by the parents unless the parents don't care at all. In which case, The school is superior for the child than the parents.

The only system in which indoctrination is not challenged is an education that stems from the parents alone, Or from the parent's selections alone. I submit that this is the only scenario in which the child has no escape.

Debate Round No. 2


1776debater forfeited this round.


Opponent forfeited R3. My R2 will be my conclusion.

May your thoughts be clear,

Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by 1776debater 3 years ago
Pardon me. I did not mean to forfeit but ran out of time. Oh well.
Posted by Leaning 3 years ago
Don't mind the post below, Is mispost.
Posted by Leaning 3 years ago
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
Educators have a huge job to do to motivate children. If the question was "Should government mandate curriculums" I'd be on the opposite side. Teachers should be able to do whatever they need to to improve education. Teachers are currently being stifled creatively and it is a massive problem. It effects teacher and student morale. Too many tests, Too much homework, Etc. Lots of this I'll go over in later rounds.
Posted by SansSkeleton 3 years ago
Greetings. I must say that I agree with you Thoht. I have read thoroughly through your argument and I do say that you do have sparked up my thinking. I am FOR public school being mandatory. Now, I shall state my opinions on this matter. The reasons why I am for public school are simply this, If an uneducated person suddenly gets into school, And goes from elementary, All the way to the end of high school, Would you not agree that they would make decent and rational decisions? Of course, If they were still uneducated, They would make worse decisions than they would if they had a high school degree. This problem applies to many people (mostly people who are born into a poor family). Another reason is if the parents are too busy to take care of their young, By them being at school for at least six/seven hours, It takes the heavy burden off their shoulders. That is my opinion.

Thank you for considering my statement
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
I'm not sure why the challenge expired. Can you resend it? I've got time today. I thought I had 1 day left on it.
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
I have accepted but may not get around to R1 for a day or so. Busy today!
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.