Topic of Persuasion

FOR // AGAINST

Issue: Do schools have to right to search students' lockers?

The Debate

In this case, the students will not bring any sort of dangerous weapons, drugs, and other hazards to school. The lockers technically belong to the school anyways, and the lockers' purpose is to put papers, extra uniform, or the student's bag into the locker. Lockers are not meant to act as a permanent storage place; it is a temporary storage while the student is in school, so there is should not be any particular reason to leave your things in the lockers. With locker checkups, students will learn to be more honest due to the fact that we can find out if they have in their lockers.

Why should the teachers have the right to search lockers? Is there a policy in the handbook and the school rules that says so? If the students have paid in their tuition that the lockers are now in their possession, then they would also have the right to ask for their privacy. It's a matter of invasion of privacy; the lockers were entrusted to the students, thus, giving them the 'key' to the lockers. Furthermore, the government owns the land of a nation, but they cannot charge into your house freely, they need a search warrant. The same concept applies this issue: The teachers and the staff own the school, but the students own their lockers.

Issue: Should physical force a justifiable method to punish children?

The Debate

The fact that in most countries of the world, physical punishments to children is efficient and quite useful to teach children. Children should automatically learn to behave by themselves, but some children are too naughty to even listen to the parents talk to them. These children have made their parents so angry that they would want to beat them. How many parents would want to beat their child for no reason? It is the child's fault, he or she has done something very wrong, and they will learn and remember their mistake through scars and bruises harsh punishment.

Why does the government have laws against child abuse, because they do not want any child to get hurt. There must be other ways to teach your children how to behave properly, there is not much need to beat your child. I believe the children will understand by themselves if you, the parent, will teach them in a way that will not make them feel too bad. Variations in tone, how you say it, and the right concepts in which the children will agree too is a much more civilized way to teach them. After all, you are setting them an example so that they will learn to be righteous men and women with educated concepts such as, basic manners like 'Please' and 'Thank You'.


Issue: Should governments negotiate with terrorists?

The Debate

Through history, the world has known that people can change through words, and the right words at the right time. It is true. If we can talk to these terrorists, we can help they change and help them to think about what they are about to do. The world must have a common trait to bring peace, terrorist negotiations is where we can start. These terrorists are humans too, we cannot just shoot them down if they are terrorists, we must act like the civilized people we are and help them to think about their suicide. If it is all about killing each other, then what has the world become?

Negotiations with terrorists cannot proceed. Goodness sake! They are humans, it is true, but they are terrorists too! They will kill us even before we try to talk to them. How will we negotiate with them anyways?   We need to react fast and quickly when a terrorist attacks, and  know how to deal with the damage. Negotiations are a quite slow process, but people can be evacuated before the bombs trigger, and our military can buy those people some time. Although it may seem unnecessary, but one person dead is at least better than a thousand innocent lives dead. The key is to react fast, instead of slowly advancing towards them and giving them a choice, those terrorists have made their choice.