Computers can replace human teachers

I know most members of this website find semantics annoying and cheap but since I'm arguing for the PRO side of this resolution I still feel a need to point out an important semantic flaw. The Resolution is 'Computers CAN replace. .. ' and even from reading Con's first argument you can see he has already admitted that it 'CAN' be done though he say's it would lose an important quality desired in a teaching environment. So by Con's own admission the Resolution has been affirmed PRO; that Computers CAN indeed replace human teachers. For that reason alone Pro already wins this debate; but lets pretend I don't for the sake of making this debate longer and more entertaining. My following arguments will apply as if the Resolution were 'Robots will. .. ' or 'Robots should. .. ' replace human teachers. Well I suppose it would be more accurate had I put 'Computers' rather than Robots, but you cant talk about this subject without getting into robots. . http://www.msnbc.msn.com... and the truth of the matter is (if you click on the link I just gave) Robots (a kind of computer) have ALREADY started to replace teachers. And all the things my opponent worries over being lost appears to have been programed into this robot teacher. She can even 'scold' a student if need be. So a robot is just as capable as a human in the teaching application. Not to mention the advantages of having a controllable programmable teacher. Once we make all teachers robots you wont have messy problems that put your school on the news in a bad way when your teacher sleeps with their students. . http://shavedlongcock.blogspot.com... You also can rest assured that the robot teacher will only teach what is in the school board agreed upon agenda. if your school said evolution would be taught, you wont need to worry about the teacher taking the personal liberty to 'make aware' their students of a controversy surrounding this topic if you don't want them too. their is very little you can do to censer human teacher's from teaching what 'they thinks important' that the school board doesn't. Next off education is perhaps the most debt inducing expense any state has. Teacher Unions are often considered one of the strongest Unions out their, making sure they can fight for every dollar they can get in their salary. remove these humans you have to pay every week for the robots you only have to purchase once and you just made running the educational system financially possible to pull off without going into debt. Some of you might go 'isn't that slavery, to employ people your not going to pay but rather pay to own'. The answer is No. their robots no one cares. Robot labor is the closest we can ever get to slave labor again while it's still moral. I think we should not miss out on this opportunity. So what do we want between the 2? Teachers that teach the things we voted on they should teach for sure and nothing else. True control over what our kids are learning? Do we want a real solution to state debt by taking teacher salaries out of the budget? Do we want to do the right thing and protect our kids from seductive randy teachers who would steel their innocence at the age of 14? Or are we going to risk our kids safety with real people? Are we going to compromise our control over what they learn by employing rouge humans? Are we going to miss an opportunity to make a feasible cut from the educational budget that could bring your state out of debt? I think the answer is clear for anyone who truly care for our young students out their. Certain jobs should only belong to robot computers, and teaching is one of them. I look forward to your response. ;)