All public schools in the United States should be required teach foreign language up to highschool.

Besides making no sense and containing multiple errors in spelling, grammar, meaning, and factual correctness, my opponent's first statement of round 3 truly dazed me. I've given plenty of reasons why we should not be required to learn foreign languages. I'll get to them later, in a numbered list. My opponent's first response was about my advocacy of teaching foreign language as an elective in elementary or middle school. There is no reason this would not be plausible; simply have one section of the day be the elective period, and have the kids go to whichever elective class they're taking. It's nothing revolutionary. For example, in 3rd grade, a few others and myself went to a separate class during the math period, since we already knew what was being taught. The same sort of thing could be done with electives. Students signed up for X go to that class, students of Y go to class Y. There's no reason that wouldn't work. I'll now respond to my opponent's points in the following format. Quoted text will be in >>these<<, my responses will be below the quoted text. >>i don't doubt that you were able to get around in italy, but, i also don't doubt that you met people there who spoke your native language(english) and that it would have been easier and more enjoyable if you understood what the majority of people were saying. Because of the fact that knowlege of italian would have helped you, and because people there helped you by speaking your native language i belive that teaching students forign languages would allow them to better enjoy themselves abrod and would allow them to travel easier. Also, i'm sure it was a releif to be able to speak your native language there, and, if you were an immigrant/visitor to the united states, it would be helpfull to be able to speak your own language, even if it is to help with learning english.<< Some people spoke a little bit of English. They likely did so by choice, since it pays to know English when you work in a touristy place (we only went to touristy places like Rome and Florence). The English they knew was not substantial, either. Regardless, they obviously did not require people to know English as a second language, since there were relatively few who did, and they were usually the store owners and such. And yet, without being forced to take English as kids, the Italians accommodated me just fine. Your overall point in the above quoted text is that learning a foreign language is helpful, therefore we should be forced to do it. This is madness. It's helpful to eat at least one meal with fish every week, but the Government shouldn't force us to. It's helpful to work 10 hours a day, but we are not nr should we be forced to. This argument does not work. Just because it is helpful does not mean we should be forced to do it. Not only that, but it's not like we don't lose anything either. It takes a lot of time to learn a 2nd language: time that could be better spent learning something more useful. Also, it is not our burden to cater to immigrants' language. Just as I bear the burden of learning Spanish if I want to live in rural Mexico, one should also take it upon himself to learn English if he wants to live in the US. If someone comes here and cannot communicate with me, it is not my fault nor my government's. It's unfair and selfish to expect a people to learn YOUR language so YOU can move there, and we should not cater to that kind of nonsense. >>first, the con advocates that there should be NO requirement for schools having to do with second languages whatsoever, and now, says that he is advocating these classes as an elective. I don't see how i'm going to be able to debate if my opponant continues to change his stance when it suits him. and, because my opponent changing his stance every speach would make it impossible for me to debate him, i urge you to vote pro.<< Perhaps you did not understand, or my words were not as concise as I hoped they were. We should not be REQUIRED to learn foreign languages AT ALL. They should be elective courses, just like C++ Programming or Woodshop. We should have a CHOICE on whether or not to take them, it should not be a requirement. I have not changed my stance, you have just misinterpreted it. My stance, regardless, it defined by the topic resolution, not words I could easily retract later. >>A.) would it not be easier for them to learn english if there were people who could understand what they were saying in their native language? yes. it would. B.) again, you can cross-apply my argument about how the con contradicts himself on this point. C.) i am not advocating that we bend over backwords, i am simply advocating that we make it easier for these people to blend in with everyone else, and, having people who could talk to them in their own language help them learn english would be helpfull to the immigrants/vacationers as well as the economy because things like this would help immigration. i would not force students to learn swahili, because it is, compared to other languages (english,french,german,spanish) a fairly small language. however, i would not mind seeing swahili classes in highschools.<< A> ESL teachers, like translators, would obviously know other languages. Or they would have a translator at their service. Believe it or not, some people know foreign languages without having them shoved down their throats. B> See above. C> Being helpful is not a reason for us to require it. It's helpful for students to take woodshop. It's not required. It's helpful to take a debate class. It's not required. It's helpful to take a newspaper class, it's not required. Just because someone would benefit from us learning second languages does not mean it should be required, nor does it mean it's even worth the effort we'd have to make in order to learn their language. Your point is empty. >>you remember some though, right? thefore, if a russian or frechman were to come up to you and ask you something, you probably could, after spending some time decyphering what they were saying, understand and possibly help this person. also, by teaching these classes in elementery and middle schools, allow students who find these classes enjoyable(and might not have otherwise taken a 2nd language) to take them, and to propel these students into taking them in highschool. also, by forcing these classes on the younger students they beleive that they should take these classes in highschool simply because they have been taking them for the last 6 years, and don't (like most students changing schools) like enormous changes.<< I know about 5 words in Russian and probably less in French. None of the words I know in Russian are from when I actually took Russian, they're from techno songs with Russian lyrics I was curious about. The French I know is more from pop culture than from taking French class back in middle school. Also, your second paragraph worries me. So not only are you advocating forcing students to learn these languages, you're advocating altering the student's later decisions in doing so. Students should only take the language if it piques their interest, not because you've forced them to do it for 6 years already. Have a numbered list of points: Forcing kids to learn foreign languages... 1. Wastes time that could be better spent. 2. Is unnecessary, even for those who wish to travel abroad. 3. Does not teach culture in any way that cannot be done easier without learning the language. 4. Delays the time when we will all have one language from coming, when such a time should be sought after. (new point) 5. Only caters to the countries who speak certain select languages. 6. Denies students their choice. 7. Is not needed regardless, since most people take foreign language classes anyway. 8. Shifts the burden from immigrants to US citizens to learn a new language, when it is not our burden to bear.