Hot button issue

"Patriotism: love for OR devotion to one's country Only one part matters. " Okay, so devotion also matters. You haven't challenged my argument about devotion, so we're even. .. "First, just because you disagree, Aristotle is not proven wrong. " Sorry for not explaining; "He supports it logically, in the basic way I support patriotism. This means voting, and he supports it by saying that if we don't vote, we aren't helpful to our nation. " This quote suggests that you need to VOTE to be helpful, and that's why he's proven wrong. "That's caring, but it is passive caring. The kind of care I speak of is the second part of def 2, to be concerned about. If I am concerned about my country, I will help it, otherwise, I am worthless. " " Main Entry: 1inï¿½terï¿½est Listen to the pronunciation of 1interest Pronunciation: \ˈin-t(ə-)rəst; ˈin-tə-ˌrest, -ˌtrest; ˈin-tərst\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, probably alteration of earlier interesse, from Anglo-French & Medieval Latin; Anglo-French, from Medieval Latin, from Latin, to be between, make a difference, concern, from inter- + esse to be — more at is Date: 15th century 5 a: a feeling that accompanies or causes special attention to an object or class of objects : concern" To have interest is to be concerned. Face it, whatever word you are trying to use, is caring. It doesn't matter if it is active or passive. "Okay, so if we take that model, then why bother teaching anything, why don't we just let the parents teach them? " Because patriotism is not necessary to establish a stable living condition in America. School teaches subjects that are NECESSARY for CAREERS, and is meant to provide an education that prepares you for life. "Since the resolution did not say the US, I will say that China should teach patriotism in schools, otherwise, the people will rebel, and chaos will ensue, which will make the Chinese a much weaker nation. China must teach patriotism or else they will fail as a nation. " It's too late to define the resolution. In round 3 I said: "I negate the resolution on the basis that these children will already be exposed to patriotism. They will have questions about presidents whenever they are mentioned, and they will ask their parents about voting. They will also learn about the history of their nation in school. They will learn what the U. S. stands for, and will agree with it. Patriotism does not need to be taught to children in school, because they will eventually stumble upon it themselves. " Notice how I refer to "presidents", and even the U. S. specifically. "But the examples of their exposure come from, guess what, school. Not teaching patriotism would mean never saying anything about loving or devotion towards the US. " Did you skip over my entire R3? I said that patriotism is exposed to children outside of school curriculum. Here are some examples: - parent's ideas of patriotism - asking questions ("What is voting? " "Who made our country? " etc. ) - American flags - the Pledge to the Flag - TV (the Olympics, the news, etc. ) To name a few. "If you encourage it, they will most likely be more patriotic than not. " See above. I have not conceded any essential points, have not contradicted myself, and have not misinterpreted my opponent's argument. On the contrary, my opponent has misinterpreted MY argument.