teens should not be allowed to date in high school.

Thanks for the response "Firstly, I would like to point out to my opponent that no relationship is failed relationship, regardless of whether or not it ends in divorce." Why do you believe that divorce is not indicative of a failed relationship? I am assuming you believe that there are benefits from failing such as learning more about life. You can apply this logic to anything-marriage on the other hand is not suitable to fit this form of logic. Marriage is sacred, it is not an experiment, and trial and error in marriage is downplaying God's laws. "Secondly, my opponent is correct in saying a person does not practice dating, but a person does gain experience in interacting with people flirtatiousl and romantically and gauging whether a person is genuine or not, which does require practice. The older a person gets, the more serious the ways they can be taken advantage of or hurt get. If you don't date sooner on when the consequences aren't as severe, then you won't be able to identify the signs and stop the relationship before it is too late." Of course you are correct, only, teenagers are not as mature as you describe. How many teenagers commit suicide because of relationships? How many teenagers actually view this as an experience? They view this as the real thing! And they treat it like the real thing. Again, I have to bring out the divorce statistics. If we are so experienced with interacting with people and understanding the opposite sex, why in the world do we still have a higher divorce rate than that of other countries who do not advocate this as much? You may believe the statistics are irrelevant, but this just shows how high school dating does not have an impact on the success of marriages (Which is what you believe it leads it to). Your argument actually bolsters my claim. "My opponent states that teen trauma can affect a person in their later life. Trauma is something that happens for everything: If one goes to a restaurant and gets the flu right after eating there, they may experience trauma. One can get post-traumatic stress disorder after experiencing a storm, but neither of these can be prevented. They are parts of life. Also, regardless of whether or not a parent restricts dating, the restriction cannot be enforced. Teenagers could have 'dates' at school or anywhere they choose. Or, because they aren't taking relationships seriously because they aren't allowed to, they will just skip to sexual experimentation." You very well know that the trauma that I describe is trauma from dating in high school. The probability of teen violence is significantly higher than violence in adulthood. Trauma from relationships will affect teens more. Some resort to cutting themselves, some resort to suicide, and some even resort to anorexia (girls who feel worthless especially). I have had anorexia, it's not just about wanting to feel thin- its also rejection. I have read so many stories on boyfriends telling their girlfriends how ugly and fat they are-these girls turn to anorexia and harm themselves in so many unfathomable ways. The consequences from dating can be lethal. The cons far outweigh the pros. Also, How many teenage pregnancies result every year? 409,840 infants are born out of 15-19 year olds. How many dreams and aspirations does this ruin? Approximately 819, 608. How many teens develop HIV and die from it? Too many. I am not banning teens from dating, I am encouraging parents to educate their children on why teen dating is vain. Knowing this, it will help but it will not annihilate all the issues. You are making a drastic assumption when you state that teens will skip to sexual experimentation. Teens will still date, I never said that I wanted to ban teen dating. Teens will still date, again, if we warn them on the uselessness of dating, high schoolers could have an improved mental health. Again, we are not arguing on the effects of not dating- the effects…we will never have an answer until try it out. Next, my opponent talks about dating being an avoidable distraction. As stated before, all distractions are. School is an avoidable distraction. I could avoid that distraction by not going, but would that be in my best interest? No. I could have a distraction that is a boy. Would avoiding them make me less distracted? Probably not. This would only lead to more teen angst, which is a distraction itself. How is school a distraction. School is what gets us to places; it is incomparable with dating. School grants us opportunities and knowledge. Dating damages us more than benefits us. Your statement is a logical fallacy. You assume that everyone benefits from dating when CLEARLY that is not true. You then go on stating that teen angst is a distraction that is more distracting than teen pregnancies, suicides, HIV, and anorexia? Hmmm…anyone can disagree with you on this fact. Everyone risks their future in everything they do. There is no action you could engage in that would not risk your future. Whether or not I take a sip of a Diet Coke or fill in the D bubble on the test could risk my future. Weighed with everything else, this point is deemed irrelevent. This point is not irrelevant. When you look at the statistics of depression, suicides, HIV, and anorexia that mostly result from teen dating, how can you compare this to something so trivial such as taking a sip of coke? How does depression, suicide, HiV, and anorexia not risk my future? It would risk my future quite literally. Dating changes with age along with everything else. In grade school the math we learn is basic, but in college it changes drastically and completely. Does that mean the basic math we learned in grade school is completely useless? Absolutely not, considering you wouldn't be able to do any math at all without knowing the basics. The same goes for relationships. If you don't learn the basics earlier, you won't be able to learn the advanced parts later. Also, the last line where my opponent asks how the two in a relationship can grow in judgment when both are trying to grow in judgment. Simply put, the two would learn how to deliberate on boundaries, what they agree with, and what they don't. My parents did not date in middle school, high school, or in college, and our family is probably more united than most of the families here. You are honestly comparing math to dating? A lot of the schools in Asia ban teen dating. Asia's marriage success rate is much higher than the marriage success rate here. Go figure! Teenagers are known to have sex with people they are in a relationship or are not in a relationship with. The difference after the forbiddance of dating would be that no teenagers having sex would be in a relationship. When in a relationship, another person is acknowledged as a meaningful person in the other's life. However, when there is no relationship in question, the sex is meaningless. During this sexually frustrated period in life, some teenagers are going to have sex. Forbidding them from dating just means they won't be having sex with someone they know as intimately, thus the sex means less. I beg to differ. Most of the teen pregnancies that result are from teen COUPLES. Again, I am not banning relationships and this is not what this debate is about. Just because a teenager is sexually frustrated does not mean that he/she should have sex. Just because human beings are inclined to sin, doesn't mean we should sin. There are some errors within your logic. Having said all this, I still strongly disagree with you With these arguments, I conclude my argument and urge spectators to vote con. http://www.cdc.gov...