Students going barefoot to school as a school rule would a good idea.

My opponent is setting forth a proof, and attempting to show that it is a bad idea for schools to implement a rule banning footwear. However, before I begin, I must make several things clear: 1. We are not talking about the plausibility of passing the rule. My opponent has set forth a proposition and neither of us will argue that it is absurd, a violation of student rights, or any such thing. This debate will be based solely on the standards that my opponent has set forth in his opening argument. 2. My opponent states in his opening round "a helpful tactic for student's education". However, all three of my opponent's opening arguments revolve specifically around a student's safety, and not particularly their education. Thus, we MUST assume that this resolution involves making the school a safe place for education, not improve the education directly. 3. My opponent is the instigator and I am the contender. He is trying to prove a point and I am trying to negate it. I need not conclusively prove that this proposal is a bad idea, I need only negate my opponent's argument that this is a BAD idea. However, I will still do my best to show that this is indeed, a good idea. Now that we have that settled, let us begin. First, I would like to summarize my opponent's key points: 1. Forcing students to go to school and go back home barefoot is unreasonable because there are environmental conditions that make this hazardous for student health. 2. Students may step on something sharp or otherwise dangerous, or just step on something annoying, like gum. 3. Physical Education classes can get dangerous if there is no protective footwear. 4. Shoelessness will exclude students from public transportation, and forcing students to walk home will be dangerous without footwear as well. Having done that, let us now examine two parts of my opponent's resolution: "not allowing having any students to have any footwear ****on school campus****" "student must go barefoot at the ****start of the school hours until the end of school hours****, even if it rains or snows. " I hope the audience has caught the same thing that I have caught. At very first sight, we can completely throw out 2 out of 4 of my opponent's arguments. My opponent has specfically stated that this rule would only take place within the school campus, and only from the start to the end of school hours. This means that before class starts and after class ends, students may wear their shoes. Furthermore, if a student has to leave school in the middle of the day, he can just wear his shoes as long as he is out of school grounds. Thus, there is no worry about transportation, environmental concerns, hazards of the road, bad weather, etc. Thus, arguments #1 and #4 can be thrown out. Argument #2 states that students might step on something sharp or dangerous. Why would any school allow sharp and dangerous things to be littering the floor in the first place? Even in schools where shoes are allowed, broken glass and other things are cleaned up immediately because school regulations require a certain level of protection for the students. There should not be anything hazardous on the ground in the first place. There is also no problem with gum. While it may be a little irritating, gum is not allowed in most schools anyway, and in those that do allow gum, it is certainly not school policy to allow students to spit gum on the floor. Even so, it is far more annoying to get gum unstuck from a sneaker than to get gum unstuck from the sole of your foot. My opponent's complaint about hookworms is misleading. Anyone who reads the source that he posted can see why: . http://www.cdc.gov... This source clearly states that hookworms are endemic "in areas with warm, moist climates". This does not describe the floor of a typical school building. Furthermore, the method of transmission is as follows: "You can become infected by direct contact with contaminated soil" Again, tile floors are not soil. The source states that hookworms can only thrive when eggs are lain into stool, which mixes in with the soil, and the eggs only hatch in soil that has met the conditions of moisture, warmth, and protection from light. Thus, it is impossible for students to get hookworms in schools, even barefoot. Thus, argument #2 can be discarded as well. Finally, my opponent mentions PE activities. Let me first point out that my opponent stated "(not including swimming classes or sports activities)" in the resolution. I find it unfair that I may not offer any evidence regarding sports activities, whereas my opponent is free to offer arguments based on sports activities. As such, I will ignore this restriction until my opponent clarifies. Many American schools have limited room, and their physical activities are limited to indoor gymnasiums, not wide outdoor fields. If such is the case, we need not worry about scrapes and cuts, because the floors would be tiled or better yet, padded. In addition, the schools that adopt this shoe policy need not play physical education games like football, basketball, or baseball. They could instead opt for Taekwondo, Kung Fu, Judo, Yoga, Tai-Chi, Gymnastics, Aerobics, and countless other sports that are easier to engage in shoeless. In fact, all of these sports are far superior in terms of burning calories and encouraging exercise and physical activity than the traditional sports. I have countered all of my opponent's arguments. Now, I shall submit my own: There are actually an enormous number of health benefits related to walking barefoot, and as our school system is responsible for the growth and health of children from ages 5 to 17, it should support lifestyles that lead to greater health and well-being. It is no secret that our ancestors went barefoot, even through the scorching savanna and the infested rainforests, our ancestors trodded shoeless for millions of years. Yet curiously, there have been no historical records of foot problems until the era of the Renaissance, when human society had become accustomed to the concept of footwear. . http://www.sixwise.com... The implementation of footwear had actually had a huge impact on health. Our bodies have evolved to walk barefoot, and the change in gait and posture by footwear actually changes our biomechanics, putting emphasis on the wrong muscles and incorrect force on the bones. This leads to unnatural fatigue and premature foot problems. . http://www.post-gazette.com... . http://lifehacker.com... These scientific studies also show that going barefoot inherently leads to fewer acute and chronic foot injuries and uses less energy and effort in foot activities. . http://www.sportsci.org... Furthermore, going barefoot also eliminates the chances of spreading foot fungus, which is actually incubated by footwear and contrary to popular belief, is not the simply the result of catching something while barefoot. The only thing that stands in the way of all these health benefits are the possible environmental dangers. However, on top of the fact that the sole of the foot actually strengthens massively upon usage, the school environment is very safe compared to the outside world, if maintained properly. If anything, school is the perfect place to implement a barefoot policy, because it is where kids from 5-17 spend the majority of their day. I look forward to my opponent's response. Thank you.