Pro vs. con view
Topic space viewschool uniforms
School uniforms take less time in the morning deciding what to wear. 2. School uniforms allows kids to focus on school rather than fashion. 3. No one can get made of in school for wearing ugly clothes 4. Kids would charcterise the less rich kids as poor based on what they wear if there were no uniforms. Good luck.
School uniforms
Hello! Welcome to the debate! I will be for school uniforms. You will be against school uniforms. 1ST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE ONLY! Good luck to you!
School Uniforms
Yes, they should. Schools that include school uniforms had a 51% less fighting rate, possibly because they didnt have anything to steal. Schools that include school uniforms had a 51% less fighting rate, possibly because they didnt have anything to steal. School uniforms also keep kids focused on their education not their clothes. They also level a playing field so people dont think one person is cooler than another just because of what clothes they are wearing, they will think ones cooler than another because of their personality which is how it should be in the first place. They also prevent people from having gang sings on clothing. Also uniforms increase school unity and school spirit,
school uniforms
Introduction and Resolution Resolution Summary: Students should wear school uniforms when attending compulsory educational courses because (1) school uniforms reduce peer pressure and (2) consequently improve the educational environment. Greetings, Debate. org. As the Pro side of this debate, it is left to me to propound a resolution in response to my opponent's claims that students should not wear school uniforms. My opponent has suggested that school uniforms should not be adopted because (1) students don't like them and (2) school uniforms suppress expressions of individuality. I will not debate that students do not like school uniforms - I certainly was never fond of them, and I am sure many of you, who are students, are or were not fond of them as well. I will, however, argue that on balance, the benefits of school uniforms outweigh the perceived negatives of having them. Specifically, it is my contention that, where students are compelled to attend educational courses in an institution of learning, such as those schools supported by the public education systems found throughout the United States, uniforms serve the important purpose of reducing peer pressure and social stigmas, which in turn enhances the learning environment for all students. Argument Argument Summary: Studies have shown that students feel less peer pressure when attending schools that enforce a dress code. Consequently, students attend classes more often and focus more on learning than on social prestige. Inducing learning is the primary function of a school. Ergo, dress codes enable schools to better perform their primary function. A school is "an institution for the teaching of children" for the purposes of this debate, as we will be discussing compulsory education (i.e. education of individuals below the age of majority). http://bit.ly...;. The purpose of the educational programs being utilized within such schools (at least within the United States) is, apparently, "to provide every child with a complete and competitive education that will enable them to succeed in a global economy based on knowledge and innovation." http://1.usa.gov..., emphasis added. Therefore, we can conclude that the primary purpose of a school is to teach children so that they have the knowledge and innovation necessary to succeed in a global economy. A school that fails to teach children for these purposes could be considered, under the relevant criteria, a failure. As no school should want to fail, schools must implement such techniques as are necessary to succeed at the stated goal of teaching children. Studies have shown that the use of school uniforms increases attendance and improves performance amongst the members of the adopting school's student body. http://bit.ly...;. Generally, every study performed seems to suggest some correlation between the adoption of school uniforms and reduced concern for social standing vis a vis attire. http://bit.ly...;. The reason for such correlation is probably best expressed in this study by Professor Richard Elliot - http://bit.ly...;. Elliot's study found that students perceived clothing as an indicator of social status, and that in some cases violence could actually occur to students perceived as not displaying the proper knowledge of social attire. As the factors implicated in Elliot's study are as much a matter of the American educational system as the British educational system (and as both are examples of compulsory educational programs), it is easy to understand how uniforms can provide the positive benefits they have been shown to produce. In an environment where impoverished students may face peer pressure based upon their limited attire selection, which peer pressure would in turn serve to disrupt their educational experience, it is not surprising that the elimination of attire selection would result in such students more readily attending school. After all, if there is no clear indicator of social status to mark them as outcasts (or to make them feel like outcasts in response to the greater wardrobe of other students), such students would have no reason to fear confrontations beyond those academic and ethical conflicts that arise even amongst a gathering of equals. This is not to say that reduced self-expression is good. It isn't. It is, however, a small price to pay for the safety, security, and comfort of the student body. In fact, regarding the safety of the student body, uniforms have been shown to help reduce educational difficulties related to students displaying gang-related attire. http://bit.ly...; Conclusion In conclusion, students experience a better educational environment in schools that utilize school uniforms. While uniforms may not be appropriate for all educational institutions, to the extent that students are compelled to attend a school environment where negative social interaction based on displays of prestige can be expected to interfere with the students' education, school uniforms should be encouraged.
School uniforms
Sigh, my opponent does not comprehend debate etiquette. I said first round acceptance, which means first round no arguments are to be presented, you must only write if you accept the challenge or not. Now you have more debate rounds then me, nevertheless I will continue. Rebuttals: "I said first round acceptance, which means first round no arguments are to be presented, you must only write if you accept the challenge or not. Now you have more debate rounds then me, nevertheless I will continue. Rebuttals: "School Uniforms aren't the best because kids can not show their uniqueness, and their differences from everyone else." In doing so, people will not get teased for being different. Arguments: First of all, we all understand what school uniforms are. So now I will explain how these school uniforms can better a school. In using school uniforms, you are preventing bullying. In the U.K. over 50% of school girls bullied are because of their appearance. [1] Appearance include clothing. So if all people in a school were to wear uniforms, it would prevent the amount of bullying significantly because everyone is wearing the same thing. You can't bully someone because of their clothes if you are wearing the same ones. Secondly, it would prevent inappropriate clothing in the school. Schools have rules, and sometimes these rules are broken. Some people could go against the clothing requirements, and wear inappropriate clothing to school, exposing skin. With uniforms, you are required to wear them, eliminating the possibility of inappropriate clothing. Thirdly, it would be cheaper to have 1 piece of clothing than to buy many. With a uniform, you would buy less clothing. IN doing so, you are helping low income families. Since I am aware of con's short argument, I decided to make mine short as well. Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
No school uniforms
"Nike is the uniform for kids all over the world. . . ""~ M. I. A. Nike is the everyday attire for kids all around the globe. People think that middle schools shouldn't have students wear school uniforms. There are many reasons why people think that middle schools shouldn't have uniforms such as everyday attire is more comfortable, It restricts students from expressing themselves, And it takes a shorter amount of time to get ready. Students want to be the most focused in school, So middle-schoolers would rather wear everyday attire because it is more comfortable. Many middle school students will agree with a writer who said: ". . . The uniforms can be very uncomfortable too tight or too loose. " (debate. Org) School uniforms can be so tight around the waist that students get a stomach ache. If middle-schoolers end up getting a stomach ache students will need to go to the office. This might cause students to miss school for the rest of the day which will put students behind in some classes. Missing class is a bad thing for students, So allowing middle If middle-schoolers end up getting a stomach ache students will need to go to the office. This might cause students to miss school for the rest of the day which will put students behind in some classes. Missing class is a bad thing for students, So allowing middle school students to wear comfortable or everyday attire such as Nike is helpful.
school uniforms
Uniforms are held to a specific standard when they are given to the school for re-use, just as if you were donating clothes to the needy. Children will not receive uniforms that are stained or worn down, they have to be in moderate shape. Kids at pubic school wear spandex to school and ill fitting clothing that isn't appropriate to wear to school. If the school isn't strict with their dress code, then children will be able to dress more freely.
School uniforms
Rebuttals: "When you get out of school you won't have uniform and then you will need to pick the clothes you want to wear. " When you get out of school you go home. Do you really chose a specific outfit to sit on the couch with? "People will just be lazy and pick the same clothes." Picking the same clothes does not make you lazy. "Also, children do need to be different from their surroundings." Not always, being the same can represent unity. "They need to learn how to be themselves and not follow their peers." With uniforms, you don't follow your peers, you follow the rules. With uniforms you learn how to listen to rules. Without uniforms, you would buy what your peers buy, if you actually read my arguments. Arguments: With uniforms, it would be easier to understand if a child is in your school or not. Let's say you go on a field trip and your class splits up into 2 groups. Later it will be easier to find the other group because they are easily distinguished by their uniforms. Con has not addressed ANY of my arguments. I have rendered ALL of her arguments, and created new firm ones. Con has repeated the same main argument with no supporting evidence: Kids need to express themselves.
School Uniforms
Many thanks to my opponent for continuing this debate. To address my opponent's first point regarding modest attire in schools. The school uniform is not an attempt to suppress individuality; there are plenty of other ways for a pupil to do that without clothes (by which I mean by deeds and words, not coming to school naked!) Regarding the issue of personal possessions in school, I can only point to my own experience of schools in England, where uniforms are compulsory. Items such as iPods, cell phones, MP3 players, etc. are not permitted on school grounds. This not only reduces the amount of bullying, but also theft. The issue of pride in a school is the same as pride in your hometown. It may be that a lad grows up in some rat-infested crack house on a desolate, windswept housing estate (project) in a neglected and rundown post-industrial city, but he will still support his local football (soccer) team with a passion. For better or worse, your school is part of your identity and you should be proud to defend it, especially in sports competitions against neighbouring schools. The cost of school uniforms, at least in England, is borne by the parents; only families on very low-incomes get vouchers from the education authority to pay for them, so uniforms do not make a large impact on schools' finances. Incidentally, school uniforms look very smart as the pictures below illustrate: http://www.etoncollege.com... http://images.inmagine.com... http://www.oakwoodschool.co.uk... I hope these comments have gone some way to allaying some of the reservations my opponent has about school uniforms. Thank you.
School Uniforms
School Uniforms enhance ones ability to learn where they do not have to worry about what others think of their clothes because they are all wearing the same. It saves time in the mornings, where you do not have to decide what your going to wear. Many kids can get bullied for not wearing designer, expensive clothes. So wearing the same uniform as others will prevent bullying. School uniforms prohibit one from feeling left out or different. It creates a feeling of oneness. It also prepares kids for future jobs that include uniforms along with the jobs.
School Uniforms
I accept this debate. The first and most obvious problem with uniforms is that they detract from student individuality and self-expression. A big part of schools is the social aspect and school uniforms limit that. Kids want to be able to show who they are and uniforms don't allow for that. It would be hypocritical for schools to celebrate diversity in culture and background then tell all the students that they must all be the same. For these reasons, uniforms are generally quite unpopular with students, mainly those in high school. The next reason is a direct result of the first. Because the students can't show individuality through their choice in clothing, they will show it through less desirable methods. These methods include altering the uniforms, tattoos, piercings, etc..., which kind of defeats the purpose of the uniforms. The final problem with the uniforms would be the difficulty in enforcing it. While most students would wear the uniforms, many would modify or incorrectly wear them, as I said above. This would cause teachers to have to be constantly on the watch for all the small details every day. They would cause the teachers more trouble than they're worth. On to my opponent's arguments! My opponent first says that uniforms may be expensive, but they stop bullying. She is right when she says that they can be expensive for poorer parents, which helps my case. The part about uniforms stopping bullying, on the other had, is incorrect. Uniforms may reduce bullying for the way the victim dresses, but they do not solve the root problem. Bullies will find other reasons to pick on kids, so the bullying argument doesn't help the Pro. My opponent also says that uniforms will reduce the amount of time it takes to get ready in the morning, which is true, but this is not important enough to be considered a real argument. Saving a few minutes in the morning is not important when weighed with the other issues here.
Uniforms at School!
Thank You Pro for this wonderful debate. "I agree" Well that's good. "it is entirely likely that the only reason the bully was picking on the kid in the first place was because of what the kid was wearing. If clothing no longer mattered then this would no longer be a problem" Sure, but no evidence has been shown that they will stop bullying just at that single point. "Well you suggested that bullies would bully somebody over the weekends. I'm suggesting that the bully would not want to waste time looking for somebody to bully over the weekends. Usually this is done at school. But this is getting off topic. This debate is about uniforms" I did... After *you*'suggested that it was the new solution to bullying. Also, notice how Pro gives no sources to support most bullying taking place at school. "Somebody who wore uniforms all his/her life would not nothing else. In other words, there would be different expectations on clothing and people would not feel uncomfortable." "Not nothing else" I don't think I could respond to he first sentence, sorry mate. I would say that if a girl feels uncomfortable in a skirt, they feel uncomfortable in a skirt. We also have the problem now that Pro dodges the argument I made regarding how uniforms restrict more active kids. "Days, weeks, months. It varies" Yet again, no source. "uniforms are uncomfortable" I'll count this as a concession? "Does that mean people have to be comfortable for every hour of their lives?" Of course not, I never said that. I do believe that people should not be forced into discomfort. Also, Pro ignores the fact that people don't have to be "Uncomfortable" or "comfortable," every second of life. It could be neither actually. "Also, I would like to point out that with modern technology, uniforms can become very comfortable" How? You haven't provided a source, and you still have yet to go into any detail regarding this modern technology. "As comfortable as regular clothes" Yet again, I can't just take your word. I need a source to prove this mate. "Children get free education at school so yes, they should respect the school" Yet again, there are many other ways to pay your respects as you even admitted with the analogy regarding USA. You ignored a neutral viewpoint argument, and pretty much everything I have said in this section of arguments. Pro also ignored the fact that not every single student in America gets free school- Some actually go to a private school, and pay for it. "For some reason, the government can afford tens of thousands of dollars on sports. New soccer and football fields every 10 years or so. So yes, I think the government/school can afford the money for uniforms" No sources to prove this. Pro has so far presented no plan on how to get the money. We have a debt problem you know. [1] "Students don't listen to dress codes. That is a big problem today. Also, if there were uniforms then there would be no need for dress codes" Sure, but no proof has been showed that all students ignore the dress code. "When I went to school, there were many people who noticeably wore different clothes every day (including shoes). Many people even admitted to wearing 7 different outfits per week" In the last round, you were referring to days, not weeks. Also, this is a logical fallacy... [2] Yet again he fails to provide a single source. "My opponent will have to show that it is impossible to express yourself when kids have to wear uniforms" This is a very outrageous claim made by Pro. I said it was *harder* to express yourself, as it limits your options drastically. "I provided statistics that suggest that students do better at school if uniforms were put into place" "I explained how students who wear uniforms at school will learn how to dress appropriately when they have a job in the future" This was countered by me suggesting that students would follow the dress code for work as they did for school, which was then never addressed by Pro again... "My opponent constantly tried to say that I presented no proof. However my opponent didn't present too much either" Another logical fallacy. [3] "He did not prove that bullies would find something else to bully about if a student wore uniforms. " You're right I never did. We both couldn't find any statistics, and you agreed to that before... "I agree" "Also, my opponent never really proved that bullies would purposely try and seek out the person they want to bully over the weekends" I never said they would, I just pointed out that on the weekends the bully's may see the child and bully him/her. It does not nullify all clothing related abuse in other words... Pro did state at one point of the debate that this would be a law. The problems of this is that he never figured out how the government could afford this, he never properly addressed that it limits captivity and how one could express themselves, nor did he address properly how kids would be restricted in the uniforms and could not do many different activities. I suggest Pro did not meet his burden of proof. [1] http://useconomy.about.com... [2] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com... [3] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
School Uniforms
I don't see the point in school uniforms. They don't make you less distracted, or confident. In fact, they make you more so. School uniforms make you focus more on what your wearing because you might hate the choice of style. If you do (which most of the kids do), you will be focused on how to improve it. Since they have no choice in what they wear, they will try to improve every little detail to draw away from the clothes (Acne, makeup, etc.) I know this from experience. School uniforms may also cause kids and parents to be unhappy and complain to the office (I know that from experience too) which would cause even more trouble. There will be no more color. Everywhere you look people wearing the same thing, that's a nightmare! Why on earth would anyone want that? The whole "purpose" of school uniforms is to draw attention away from clothes and your appearance, but as I already explained, it draws more attention, and more stress. You choose your clothes on how they look on you. School uniforms look good on almost no one. Also, If you have to buy your own uniform (Grey bottom, white top) for instance, kids would still be picked on. In this generation, if you wear the same style of clothes, but if one costs more, the other will get picked on. I am in middle school, and I also know this from experience. And yes, by the way some kind of fabrics are very itchy.
School uniforms
School uniforms are a bad idea because the kids wear these uniforms all week. Their regular clothing is rarely used because they only wear them on the weekends.
School uniforms
I thank my opponent for the effort invested in this debate. Rebuttals: "Child labour is not necessarily bad." "The term “child labour” is often defined as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development. It refers to work that: is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and interferes with their schooling by: depriving them of the opportunity to attend school; obliging them to leave school prematurely; or requiring them to attempt to combine school attendance with excessively long and heavy work." source: http://www.ilo.org... Child labour is without doubt and by definition bad. Fair trade clothing is more expensive than slave-labour-produced clothing, thus putting even more financial strain on poor families. It is unlikely that all schools can be outfitted with fair trade clothing, since the US alone have 50 million children at school age (source: http://www.childstats.gov... ). This cannot be produced by fair trade capacities. "Since you are using this the entire year, you would buy much less clothes." "Also, you can show yourself outside of school as well." This is a clear contradiction. You clearly state that the uniform would be worn at school while other clothes are worn outside of school. Since clothing needs to be washed at LEAST every two days, regardless how long you wear it on a particular day, due to the smell of sweat, the uniforms will in no way reduce the number of clothing pieces the pupils wear. It will just be an additional amount of clothing to be worn in school. For similar reasons, you need more than one set of uniform. You cannot wear one set of uniform for an entire week without washing. So you need more than one set of uniform, at least doubling the cost you claim. you claim that the clothing need not get dirty, but we are discussing children here. Many will be careless. "Also there are sponsor programs to get the uniforms." By the numbers, even if only 10% of all children needed a sponsor, this would mean 5 million children, and by the cost we have established, this would equal 150$ x 2 (two sets) x 5 000 000 = 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS. This money would easily be better invested in books and computers. I also doubt there will be enough sponsors for that demand. "Also, even without the uniforms, there would still be child labour, so there would be no big difference." We're talking mass orders of a total of 15 billion dollars' worth of clothing. Of course those will make a difference. In order to fight child labour, we need to stop supporting it. Paying billions of dollars to people who abuse children as work slaves will support them greatly, encouraging them to keep going. "All clothes would do the same, so it would not matter if it was a school uniform or not." As established above, school uniforms are ADDITIONAL clothing. So they will also mean an additional poisoning the environment. Clothes in the numbers listed above are only produced on pre-order, so this is additional toxic waste. "Since you would have less clothes, there would be less clothes to wash." But there's MORE clothes to wash, as shown above. "Also there are eco friendly detergents." That doesn't make them harmless. Even completely bio-degradable detergents cause problems: http://theconversation.com... "Bullying can come from clothing, and even though bullying would not become completely nullified, it will be weakened, which is better than nothing." But by your own account you argued there was no need to go against child labour, if it didn't make much of a difference. You're making up arguments opportunistically, to fit your very need. This is a contradiction. Also, I highly doubt that bullying would be effected in the least, as bullying because of clothing is just an expression of moral defects in the bullies. What you claim would be the equivalent of saying that giving a man in the rain a torn umbrella was better than nothing - yet he will be completely soaked, as the umbrella doesn't actually help getting the man out of the rain. Bullying must be counteracted with awareness programs, not by forcing children to wear clothes they did not chose for themselves - which is in itself a kind of suppression. How can suppressing your freedom protect you from your freedom being suppressed by bullies? In the end, bullies who didn't want the school uniforms will pick on the same children AGAIN because they have to wear these uniforms BECAUSE of their complaints about bullying. This will seriously not solve the problem. "Just because someone wears a uniform doesn't mean they will fight with others." Read "The Wave", an accurate account of an experiment on fascism conducted in a school some decades ago. Uniforms bring groups closer together and in conflict with other groups. That is why football teams have uniforms and mascots. This is to make them try harder to defeat the "others". Uniforms exist for discernment, or DISCRIMINATION as a synonym. It creates borders, dividing groups and creating group identities set against each other. "Furthermore, many parents walk home with their students, so they would stop a fight if one were to occur." This is another contradiction. If parents were able to protect their children, there would be no bullying because of clothing right now, either. Parents cannot achieve this, nor can teachers. Otherwise, the whole point about stopping bullying through uniforms would be moot. The uniforms are supposed to stop or reduce the bullying that is totally out of control right now. "However this bullying already exist and is already practised. With or without uniforms, it will occur, but with uniforms, you will get rid of bullying through clothing." Now you admit that bullying will continue "with or without clothing", meaning you admit that the amount of bullying will actually NOT decrease. Thank you for aiding my point. "This is unimportant. There are many ways to show yourself in school, and let's face it, clothing is not often used." Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." You are seriously arguing against the Declaration of Human Rights? "With or without uniforms, people still get bullied for their skin. So it doesn't matter." Exactly. So uniforms are useless and cost way too much. "And also, if you ask me, getting bullied because you have bad clothes because you are pour is worst than getting bullied because you are African." That is a hypothesis I would like you see defend. you are actually claiming that RACISM is less bad than being bullied for clothes you can change? Surely, it is worth to be discriminated by something you are not accountable for, because that is unjust and you cannot do anything to avoid it, making you completely helpless. "I would like to point out that my opponent only mentioned small scenarios that practically never happen." Numbers mean nothing. Regardless how often something wrong happens, it is still wrong. Confusing quality and quantity is a critical mistake. Even if only one child has to suffer, will YOU take responsibility for it with YOUR decision to support school uniforms? So far, these situations don't happen a lot, because we don't HAVE school uniforms in most parts. Who are you to foretell the future? I state that I'm WORRIED about harmful consequences, while you just brush them away. That is not the intent of a debate. "inappropriate clothing". This is a circular argument. You DEFINE school uniforms as "appropriate" and other clothing as "inappropriate". Then you go on to explain that appropriate clothing is better, hence uniforms are better. Most schools have regulations against "revealing" clothing, and children break these rules. What makes you believe that a rule to wear school uniforms would fare any better? "sleep". How about parents - you gave responsibility to them with your "walking home" argument above - simply teach their children not to be so picky about their clothes? Ultimately, your "argument" is a disguised repetition of your - self-admittedly weak - bullying argument. Children need to pick clothes carefully because of the fear of bullying. It wouldn't be long before bullying took another form, for instance freckles or spots. Then the same amount of time would be needed to cover those up before class, resulting in the same problem of sleep-deprivation. Bullying exists and is undesirable, so pupils subjected to it will always try to find ways to counteract it. These protective measures will always consume time. So if bullying is not ended, there will not be additional time for sleep. Here's a simple solution to the sleep problem, though: pick clothes the evening before, have them ready when you wake up. No hasty decisions needed in the morning while you are not yet fully functional due to sleep-deprivation. Since this is my final go, I would like to thank my opponent for this short bout. I will summarize: My opponent suggests supporting child labour, has no regard for the Human Right to Self-Expression and considers racism to be less of a problem than clothing issues - all in order to defend the obligatory introduction of school uniforms. I think I have made it fairly clear that on these grounds, no solid argument in favour of school uniforms can be upheld. These points of view may not be the price we pay just because we can't get bullying under control. These are three of the most basic rights for humans ever established, and we may not give those up because of the failure of our school system to educate children on why bullying is bad. Thank you for reading this.
School Uniforms
School uniforms make children the same, but when we wear our own clothes we represent our individuality and show who we are, but having a school uniform will become perpetual if we don't stop and show our rights. we should be free to show our individuality and not stay stuck in the grey colourless outfits we call uniforms.
School Uniforms
School uniforms, in general, seem to stretch the notion of assertion over students. There may be advantages with respect to fashion conservation, but it still destroys the concept of independence and art. In reality, wearing such uniforms brings a relatively stable nation like America, more like that of Syria, where uniforms are required by students, as well as longer class days (everyculture.com). If there is not a decrease in student morality, then certainly there can be one in their artistic flare. As the sun-sentinel.com suggests, wearing “uniforms stifle creativity” implying that to be creative proposes to not wear them in the first place (material conditional then modus tollens). While they may have their benefits, they harm far more.
School Uniforms
I don't think that schools should have school uniforms because children cannot express themselves. When you are young, it is vital to be able to express your personality and find out who you really are. The first amendment states that all individuals have the right to express themselves. With school uniforms, how are you supposed to do that?
School Uniforms
Today, I will be arguing AGAINST the implementation of school uniforms. That means my opponent must SUPPORT school uniforms, in one way or another. In Round One, I expect my opponent to say "I accept the debate," and wait for me to make the opening argument in Round Two. That is all!
School Uniforms
Ok, the title is pretty self-explanatory, this debate is whether or not school uniforms should be required nationwide. I am taking the con position, and my opponent has the objective of proving that school uniforms would be helpful to the nation in elementary and high schools. I will let my opponent have the first round. Good luck, and thank you for accepting this debate.
