feminism should always exist but in more friendly ways like women actually advocating and discussing instead of shouting at people and only for logical purposes
My argumentation doesn't aim at making homework eternal, it is based on the idea that at this given time it is preferable that it remains established. How is anyone supposed to know and surely dictate whether it's a good idea to have it 50 years later. For this specific idea, i intend to advocate for its value and show that if implemented in more modern ways, the majority would be happy. As for attacking, i am not going to because this is a rather vulgar way to address strikers in any context. Again, i will try through the power of words and persuasion to deter most people from ever needing to go on strikes. If these people choose to ignore me and make public displays with no basis whatsoever, there's nothing to be done about it from my behalf, i do not constitute the government.
My goal is that homework exists nothing else, evident by my postion. Yet you asked a question regarding the existence of this debate and since i created it, it was my obligation to start answering and mention some downsides to my position( i was going to dispute them in my argumentation nonetheless). So, unless there's a question strictly regarding con, i figure we should stop and avoid further confusing people about my position
I am not here to ban hw, i am here to argue that it should exist. Yet, this fellow debater asked questions that could only be answered if i am pretending to be pro. I am simply jotting down thoughts through my personal experience that have nothing to do with neither my argumentation nor my position
I want you to realise that i am con and i am simply voicing the requests of a certain community when it comes to this debate. Your making the concept of skipping homework sound very serious, like a war tactic which requires sacrifices and so on. War is similar to homework only in the sense that it is imposed upon a certain group of people and it leads to people taking risks in order to avoid their effects . These risks wouldn't exist if governments banned homework meaning that students wouldn't have to for example fake sick, forge signatures in letters supposedly written by their parents enabling them to not do homework. These are all risks not actions that have a slight possibility of working but if they don't they lead to more significant consequences than the ones a student would endure should they just choose to not do homework in the first place. Finally, imagine a child in elementary or middle school that just doesn't feel like doing homework. This child is a sensitive human beings and is committing the most minor offence possible. Should he/she have to go through disappointing his parents, potentially getting suspended by the school or spanked by parents just because he skipped homework? No, and that's why he/she supports that homework shouldn't exist. Obviously, this is a very crude argument on which you can't base any decisionmaking, yet you can see one side of the argument on which we have been arguing about for the past one and a half hour.
Yea i get your point but most people do care about their grades and believe that homework should not be taken into account and should not exist because they dont want bad grades. These people don't neglect homework because they dont care about their grades but because they think it's mainly a waste of time. As for the principals thing, oviously they don't spank you but the principal's main role is to punish students, lets not bullshit so if u are taken to the principal they can call your mom and then your mom will spank you or they can give you some form of detention which students also try to avoid.
In some countries, forgetting homework drops ur grades down and in more strict ones they take u to principals so u currently have the choice not to but pro is supposed to argue that not doing homework is perfectly fine and should be allowed
First of all, great name choice. Secondly, i'm sorry for the character limit but i dont have that much time to debate and i try to make the best of it whereas the twelve hour limit for arguments was accidental,ill make sure to provide a better format next time but forgive me as that this was my first debate. (p.s i liked your rebuttal)
I believe there is a distinct difference in what feminists stood for 100 years ago and their behavior now. From what, i've understood the debate refers to the latter version and more specifically toxic feminists, who are indeed a problematic community, yet you can't just generalise toxic and non-toxic feminists. Nonetheless, toxic feminists and sigma males are both sets of behavior we need to erase.
feminism should always exist but in more friendly ways like women actually advocating and discussing instead of shouting at people and only for logical purposes
in every country guns could be allowed. The question is what rules should exist if guns were one day allowed and how strict
if school and lessons were completed in more practical ways, like actually experiencing the theories u talk about, it would be much more interesting
Me too i wanted to challenge myself but pls vote con
The problem is not really the healthcare systems, it's mainly what's going on in terms of crime and illegal activity tbh
My argumentation doesn't aim at making homework eternal, it is based on the idea that at this given time it is preferable that it remains established. How is anyone supposed to know and surely dictate whether it's a good idea to have it 50 years later. For this specific idea, i intend to advocate for its value and show that if implemented in more modern ways, the majority would be happy. As for attacking, i am not going to because this is a rather vulgar way to address strikers in any context. Again, i will try through the power of words and persuasion to deter most people from ever needing to go on strikes. If these people choose to ignore me and make public displays with no basis whatsoever, there's nothing to be done about it from my behalf, i do not constitute the government.
(They are kinda misleading but not entirely and as you said it wouldn't be that wise to disperse my arguments like that)
My goal is that homework exists nothing else, evident by my postion. Yet you asked a question regarding the existence of this debate and since i created it, it was my obligation to start answering and mention some downsides to my position( i was going to dispute them in my argumentation nonetheless). So, unless there's a question strictly regarding con, i figure we should stop and avoid further confusing people about my position
I am not here to ban hw, i am here to argue that it should exist. Yet, this fellow debater asked questions that could only be answered if i am pretending to be pro. I am simply jotting down thoughts through my personal experience that have nothing to do with neither my argumentation nor my position
I want you to realise that i am con and i am simply voicing the requests of a certain community when it comes to this debate. Your making the concept of skipping homework sound very serious, like a war tactic which requires sacrifices and so on. War is similar to homework only in the sense that it is imposed upon a certain group of people and it leads to people taking risks in order to avoid their effects . These risks wouldn't exist if governments banned homework meaning that students wouldn't have to for example fake sick, forge signatures in letters supposedly written by their parents enabling them to not do homework. These are all risks not actions that have a slight possibility of working but if they don't they lead to more significant consequences than the ones a student would endure should they just choose to not do homework in the first place. Finally, imagine a child in elementary or middle school that just doesn't feel like doing homework. This child is a sensitive human beings and is committing the most minor offence possible. Should he/she have to go through disappointing his parents, potentially getting suspended by the school or spanked by parents just because he skipped homework? No, and that's why he/she supports that homework shouldn't exist. Obviously, this is a very crude argument on which you can't base any decisionmaking, yet you can see one side of the argument on which we have been arguing about for the past one and a half hour.
Yea i get your point but most people do care about their grades and believe that homework should not be taken into account and should not exist because they dont want bad grades. These people don't neglect homework because they dont care about their grades but because they think it's mainly a waste of time. As for the principals thing, oviously they don't spank you but the principal's main role is to punish students, lets not bullshit so if u are taken to the principal they can call your mom and then your mom will spank you or they can give you some form of detention which students also try to avoid.
In some countries, forgetting homework drops ur grades down and in more strict ones they take u to principals so u currently have the choice not to but pro is supposed to argue that not doing homework is perfectly fine and should be allowed
First of all, great name choice. Secondly, i'm sorry for the character limit but i dont have that much time to debate and i try to make the best of it whereas the twelve hour limit for arguments was accidental,ill make sure to provide a better format next time but forgive me as that this was my first debate. (p.s i liked your rebuttal)
I believe there is a distinct difference in what feminists stood for 100 years ago and their behavior now. From what, i've understood the debate refers to the latter version and more specifically toxic feminists, who are indeed a problematic community, yet you can't just generalise toxic and non-toxic feminists. Nonetheless, toxic feminists and sigma males are both sets of behavior we need to erase.