Alternatives to Public Schooling Should Not be made Illegal.

I suppose I’ll begin with quick rebuttals, and then focus on my closing argument. “The common core proposal you're discussing is utterly irrelevant.” —It has everything to do with it. Abolishing alternatives to public schooling will ultimately force everyone to adhere to these standards. Remember the terms and definitions at the beginning of the debate. Alternatives to public schooling means alternative curriculums, too. And the debate revolves around the American public school system. You cannot make valid points which claim that nationalizing education will raise our standards and provide people with better education without considering Common Core Standards. “Here's an interview with a Professor at Notre Dame...” —Sources cannot be used as an argument by themselves. My point is acknowledged as fact until an opposing argument backed up with evidence is presented. “Your fundamental problem is equating the current core...” —I disagree with your claim that this has nothing to do with the argument. First, as I have already said, prohibiting alternatives to public schooling will ultimately force every child in America onto the Common Core Standards. It has everything to do with this debate. Second, You seem to have trouble recognizing that children will be forced upon a standard that will ultimately lead to massive lowering of educational quality in America. I have shown this in my previous evidence, and it is fact by your dismissal of it. “As to your argument that it doesn't abolish alternatives...” —My argument was that you can standardize your public schools without abolishing alternatives to said public schools. Now, what you’re saying about the State setting curriculum and rules go back to the Common Core Standards. You can’t give people better education by completely nationalizing education, at least while there are standards being implemented that will lower our standards to such a low point that you are not even allowed to study past Algebra II. “No. They really don't. The fact is that if any Tom, Dick, and Harry can set up a school, that will result in far more problems than a curriculum devised by the Department of Education.” —You have to remember that currently Tom, Dick, and Harry’s schools outperform the Department of Education by a large amount, according to the student average ACT and SAT scores of public and private schools [1]. I don’t see how you can ignore the evidence that I have presented which show that the Common Core Standards will lower the standards of public schools to an extremely low point. While said standards are being implemented, you cannot truthfully claim that government-enforced curriculum will be better than what is being taught in private schools. “If you think Global Warming isn't real or that FDR didn't...” —This is an ad hominem fallacy. Don’t attack my personal beliefs for the sake of your argument. There is something in the Constitution called the First Amendment. By abolishing alternatives to public school curricula, we are subscribing American children to one way of thought. When you tell me that I can’t say what I want to say, that I can’t teach, speak, and communicate in the ways that I want to do, because it violates your own personal beliefs, it is violating my own freedom to express my opinion, my freedom of speech. Freedom of the press is pretty much in context with this -- we have the freedom to publish what we want, no matter how untruthful or slanderous. We have the freedom to publish what we wish, and if you view it as false, then we have no fear of you taking it away from us while we view it as truth. “You really seem to have a fetish over Nazi Germany.” —Does this qualify as ad hominem? Attack the substance, not the opponent. My point has been validated by his dismissal. “In a home-school program, there is no administrator there to…” —This section was written out of ignorance, and based on stereotypes which are not fortified by facts. As a home-schooler myself, it makes my blood boil. This was a harsh and desperate attack on home-schooled and privately schooled children. I’ll make a few quick points. 1. Because of the increased free time for extracurricular activities, and the motivation to seek out friends, most home-schooled children get more social interaction with the outside world than most public-schooled children. The Discovery Institute released a report on homeschooling at the turn of the century. Though a progressive-leaning organization, they note that home-schooled families are more active in civic affairs than public schooled families. It is better for social skills to seek out friends of your own, than be thrown together with 20 to 30 children in a classroom, where peer pressure is enormous. [2] 2. My opponent tries to make a claim that grouping together white, Conservative, Christian children together has a negative impact on society, which is racist. 3. If it’s human nature to force itself into smaller groups, then obviously you would be having the same problem of de facto segregation in public schools. Your argument cancels itself out, because you can’t have segregation being human nature, while public schools remain a solution to segregation. “Re-evaluating our educational structure...” —You can level the playing field, and re-evaluate our educational structure, without abolishing alternatives. The only way you can truly level the playing field is open up the educational system to new opportunities. We cannot have a ‘one-size-fits-all’ system, otherwise there will be no success. Public schools in America have been holding children back, by forcing kids to stay at the pace of the class. By allowing alternatives to public schooling, we can allow children who want to work for higher education, to do so by themselves, instead of being forced to stay back for the sake of the class. “...I believe they need to be shut down so those children can receive a real education.” —How would children receive a better education by schools being shut down? Data I have presented has clearly shown that by global standards, people in private schools get better education than people in public schools. “If you don't believe in evolution as the means through which we became what we are today, then...” —Ad hominem much? Also, you’re making an argument for microevolution, not macroevolution. —I’d like to note to my opponent quickly that sources cannot be used as arguments. You make that mistake many times, and I ask voters to take that into consideration when voting.Summary of my Arguments—By abolishing all alternatives to public school curricula, it abolishes our freedom of the press.—Removing alternatives to public schooling would immediately lower standards, because of the Common Core standards being implemented already, and because privately schooled and home-schooled children get better education already.—Historically, public schools run a higher risk of indoctrinating children to a mindset than private schools. This has been acknowledged by my opponent as fact, by his failure to address it.—The right to educate one's self in the beliefs that he holds has been accepted as a premise by my opponent; therefore abolishing alternatives to public schooling becomes a violation of said right.—Public schools can be fixed without violating freedom of the press by abolishing alternatives to public schooling.—Because it was not addressed directly, and my points are accepted by my opponent, it is accepted that abolishing alternatives to public schooling will deteriorate society.I'd like to note to voters that logical fallacies were used in my opponent's arguments, and I expect them to be addressed in your votes.Thank you,—TheYummyCod 1. http://www.daytondailynews.com... 2. http://www.discovery.org...