Curent high school education should not be mandatory

I accept all of Con's definitions. C1: "Maybe so, but this is a very small benefit compared to the huge benefit that high school currently produces. As I previously stated, those who get out of high school usually go to college and further their studies. Some become extremely successful and make plenty of money for the economy." They do not provide plenty of money for the economy, unless these people are somehow counterfeiters (a felony which one should not promote) or work for the Federal Reserve. Rather they either provide goods or services that benefit society, find ways to reduce prices of goods or services, or fund the two (ex: financial advisors or bankers). I'd also note that t Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg (founders of facebook) are college drop outs yet provided goods (Microsoft and facebook) that are used widely today. Also, those that provide goods and services that benefit society, also receive money for themselves, so these people have self-interest to go to either high school or college. Even though college is not mandatory, many people still attend college due to the likelihood of higher paying jobs in the future. C1/2: "I have to completely disagree. How is science and mathematics not important? These two extremely important subjects have funded society as we know it today" In my opening topic I did not state that high school is not useful. I stated that high school should not be mandatory. I understand that these subjects are important to medical doctors, engineers, scientists, writers, etc. You even state yourself: "In every class, you have those who are not that dedicated to learning, and those people take lower skilled jobs". That is the point. Jobs like janitors, construction workers, drivers, garbage collectors, mailman and cashiers do not have to learn this information. Even service industry jobs such as chiefs, hair/nail stylists, actors, entertainers and musicians still do not have to learn this information. Even if every single person in the world got a PhD, there would still be people working in these fields, because there will always be a demand for them. We will always need the janitor and garbage crew to help keep civilization clean. We will always need drivers for buses, construction workers to create new houses, roads, and other infrastructure. We will always need drivers to transport us from one place to another if one does not have access to a car. These people should not have to waste their time and effort in high school. C3: "This statement basically suggests that we should completely not focus on our friends and families that do poor in school and let them drop out and possibly resort to a life of crime." Why would dropping out of school lead to a life of crime? Should I help somebody go to the Justin Bieber concert, if one does not want to go to it? Should I help someone to have sex, if one does not want to have sex? Should I help someone go to school who doesn't want to? No, because the person does not WANT help, and by helping the person, you are creating more harm in the process. "Why are high schools better when attendance to high school is not forced? How does that make sense?" If you take notice here: http://4brevard.com... notice that the countries that perform better than the United States at the very least have a division in high school, between vocational school and preparation for college tracks. Also, explain why American universities are considered to be the best in the world while our high schools are mediocre? My mother, an ex-high school teacher hated the atmosphere since her job was mostly to control the class and found it difficult to teach anything. However, she went to become a math professor and did not have the same problems she did with high school students. So not only does requiring students to be in high school cause disruptions in class which makes learning difficult, but it also causes competent teachers to leave the system. C4: "This is absurd. A completely free society is a chaotic one. Everyone would do whatever they'd like and commit crimes, with no punishment involved" "You yourself said prison, military, and school are where freedom of speech is severely hindered. This is untrue" This rebuttal is absurd, since it assumes that this resolution creates a chaotic society. Murder, rape trespassing, slander, and stealing will still be illegal. The bases of which society's laws are based on are "social contract" which states that the government should be designed to protect our rights that would be infringed upon in anarchy (ex: life and property). As far as I'm concerned, I do not see how not going to school is harming anyone else in the world. Also freedom of speech in school is prohibited if it is offensive, disruptive, or impairs the educational mission. For example, in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier issues in the school newspaper could not address teen pregnancy or divorce. [http://en.wikipedia.org...] Rebuttals R1: "1. High school has a huge benefit. High school is the bridge to college." Contentions 1 and 2 basically talk about this and I do not want to repeat myself. However, I will note that I did not say that high school does not have a benefit, but it doesn't benefit everyone, and thus should not be mandatory. R2: 2. "High school is the first step to your career job. Due to all the subjects involved in this type of school, 16 year olds begin to see they enjoy a particular subject, for example math. That leads to college, where the young adult begins to try a degree in that very subject." The top paying undergraduate degrees are in engineering, physics, computer science and economics. http://www.payscale.com.... With the exception of physics, these subjects are not required in high school, and engineering classes are rarely even offered in high school. Also note how at the very bottom of the list: English, Literature, and Humanities, core subjects in high school, are lower paying salaries. Also note that the cores are also taught from K-8, so that one can develop an interest in them at a younger age. I also do not understand why one cannot discover their passion on their own, rather than have school discover them for you. If one truly enjoys something, it should not require school for someone to pursuit or find their passion. I find this method a lot better than cramming the material down their throats (this is an expression, not a literate meaning) and stressing people out with exams and annoying projects, thus ruining one's joy for the subject. For example, I used to hate writing persuasive essays in high school. However, after learning about the rules of logic and logic fallacies in my spare time, I became interested in debates. However, I still became unsatisfied since I learned that persuasive writing offers no option for someone to make a rebuttal and if debating with somebody, the person will rarely accept defeat and ends with bad conduct, ending in no real winners. However, at debate.org I can enter a non-hostile environment, where good conduct is required, people can give feedback on debating, and I can enter into challenging debates that make me think. It is through this, not from high school, that I learn to enjoy debating, which can result in me becoming a lawyer, lobbyist or politician.