REGLION SHOULD BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE SCHOOLS!!!!!

I BELVE THAT IF CHRISTIANITY WAS BOUGHT BACK TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM THEN IT WOULD BE BETTER OFF.EVEN THOUGH MANY THINGS HAVE HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT RELIGON WAS IN SCHOOL,I THINK THAT IN TODAYS SOCIETY THAT IS IS A NEED.....I THINK THAT IF REGLION WAS BOUGHT IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM THEN ,MANY OF THE PROMBLEMS WOULD NOT BE THEIR.I UNDERSTAND THE MANY REGLION BELIEFS,BUT IF THATS THE CASE THEN THE SCHOOLS SHOULD BE DIVIDED BY REGLIONS THEN...I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER OFF.

Hi there Jazzyfizzle, let's see how this goes =D

In any discussion of what should be done in American schools, it's obvious what we're inherently valuing, and this is a good education for our students. If my opponent can prove that bringing religion into schools would be a good thing for studnets then she will win the debate. However, if I can prove that standards of education and the lives of students would be best served by a secular separation of church and school then we will be forced to vote Con.

My opponent's argument is semi-coherent and more like a rant than anything else. Despite that, I'll try to address what she's saying to the best of my abilities, and I will also present various arguments that argue the opposite.

My opponent says "IF CHRISTIANITY WAS BOUGHT BACK TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM THEN IT WOULD BE BETTER OFF . . . IF REGLION WAS BOUGHT IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM THEN ,MANY OF THE PROMBLEMS WOULD NOT BE THEIR." It's hard to rebut something like this, largely because there's absolutely no substance. Not only does Jazzy have no evidence to back up her claims, she has no argument as to why schools would be better off with religion. From what I could translate from her pidgin english, it seems that she's saying that various problems in society (a nebulous undefined concept) might be solved if we promoted religious study in schools. This is false, and in fact the opposite is true.

As a whole, religion promotes close-mindedness, bigotry, and prejudice. It creates an "us" and a "them." It promotes the notion that you are right and they are wrong; you are going to heaven and they are not. It would stifle freedom of expression and of thought. And for the government to teach religion in public schools would be for the government to endorse a specific way of thinking while silencing others. This is dangerous for a number of reasons. In "On Liberty," John Stuart Mill breaks it down:

"Not the violent conflict between parts of the truth, but the quiet suppression of half of it, is the formidable evil; there is always hope when people are forced to listen to both sides; it is when they attend only to one that errors harden into prejudices, and truth itself ceases to have the effect of truth, by being exaggerated info falsehood. . . . If any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility."

I don't even need to say it, but to promote religious education in schools would be to violate the 1st Amendment, which allows the free practice of all beliefs and ideas: it is the not the job of the government to tell us which ideas are wrong and which are right.

My opponent finishes her case with this: "I UNDERSTAND THE MANY REGLION BELIEFS,BUT IF THATS THE CASE THEN THE SCHOOLS SHOULD BE DIVIDED BY REGLIONS THEN...I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER OFF."

It's a surprisingly complex idea coming from Jazzy,and I have to admit I was impressed. Sadly, it's a ludicrous suggestion. What it does is promote balkanization and fragmentation. It undermines unity, it breaks America into a nation of tightly closed religious sects that only go to schools that teach what they want to hear. This sort of close-mindedness is the reason America has so many societal ills. To support Jazzy is to accept this; and in the end, the groups that would be hurt most by this fragmentation of education would be the students themselves, who would not be exposed to those who think differently, speak differently, and look differently. The students who would be spoonfed religious prattle would be those affected most.

For all these reasons, I urge you to vote Con.

Thank you =D

~Aietius

Ok you try to prove your point by saying 'It undermines unity, it breaks America into a nation of tightly closed religious sects that only go to schools that teach what they want to hear. '..And I understand you..But even with out the teachings in school, their are already division between the many Religion ..But you are going to have to understand that their are going to be people with different views...Those with exclusives views (which only belief that their is only one belief and theirs is the best. And for those people with them beliefs then maybe they should out their kids in a school that is all Religion ..And then you have the people that have the belief of inclusive beliefs .which is they know they there Religion is true, but would not mind the interference of other Religion For the simple fact that the same truth that's in their Religion ,is in some ways can be into eh other Religion ...... The list goes on and on. You have to understand that no matter what someone may say about Religion being in the schools, theirs always going to be someone who have to say something about it.

To be quite honest, it is impossible for me to rebut my opponent's round 2 argument because it is just too incoherent. I'll just restate and crystallize my own, which is that teaching religion in schools would be in essence giving the government the power to say what ideas are right and what ideas are wrong, which is dangerous. I gave evidence through the words of John Stuart Mill.

Furthermore, by making separate public schools for students who believe in different gods would only balkanize and divide the nation even more.

This is not to say that I don't think students should not learn about religion, but I am saying that schools should not advocate a return to religious education, per se.

Maybe in the next round Jazzy will write something I can respond to =(

maybe you can)you said that this will give the government a chance to say what is right and what is wrong..but in many ways they already do that..based on stereotypes, and by them not keeping religion in the school system is the government saying what is the right thing.....religion should be brought back in the school system because after taking to the people who were in school when religion was in the school, they all said that the school was better of...if you would only speak to someone who had opportunity to go to school when religion was in school, you would understand....

Great, thanks for responding Jazzy!

Jazzy rebuts my argument that the government should not have the power to say what ideas are right are wrong by saying that the government does this already. While she doesn't conclude this observation with an argument, I assume she's saying that therefore the government should just keep doing it. She also says that by keeping religious education out of schools, the government is censoring ideas already. This is not true, because like I said, I think the government should teach ABOUT religion, but should not advocate certain ideas like Jazzy is proposing.

She then offers evidence that religious education is a good thing because she talked to friends who said it was good. This is not an argument, this is worthless prattle.

Ultimately, you should definitely vote con because I prevented a multifaceted argument that looked at violations of first amendment rights, social theory in terms of free speech through the words of John Stuart Mill, and the inevitable balkanization and division that creating separate schools that teach separate religions would create.

Thank you =D

~Aietius