• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support school uniforms?

What is your stance on School Uniforms?

  • Yes and the school should offer them at no extra cost.

    Votes: 20 18.3%
  • Yes and the parents should pay for them.

    Votes: 40 36.7%
  • They should be optional for students who want them

    Votes: 2 1.8%
  • There should be school uniforms for specific activities only

    Votes: 3 2.8%
  • We should leave it to the parents to decide if the school should have uniforms

    Votes: 10 9.2%
  • We should leave it at municipal/state level

    Votes: 10 9.2%
  • We shouldn't have school uniforms at all

    Votes: 24 22.0%
  • I like the current way things are.

    Votes: 5 4.6%
  • I hate uniforms

    Votes: 9 8.3%
  • I'm a potato.

    Votes: 13 11.9%

  • Total voters
    109
I'm against political correctness for the most part, but I am for a dress code. I must be really mixed up! :mrgreen:
Well, according to your profile, you are a woman...



I kid, I kid! :mrgreen:
 
Uniforms would only be a small part of the solution.
Having the adults in charge would be a much larger part of it.

You don't need uniforms to maintain order and adults are already in charge.
 
You don't need uniforms to maintain order and adults are already in charge.
Both true. You also don't need meaty tomato sauce on your spaghetti noodles, but doesn't it make it so much better?
 
Thankfully, my children are adults now, but when they were in school,
I gave a fair amount of thought to this subject.
When the kids were in intermediate school, uniforms began to be required,
and it did appear to improve both moral and discipline.
This is from the observation of an involved parent.
Most of us ware uniforms everyday, as most places of employment
have some for of dress code.
The goal for most parents, is to see their children become happy,
successful, productive members of society.
If school uniforms help with this that's ok.
On a different level, I think the uniforms could be made by the
state prisons, and sold to the parents at the cost of goods sold.
 
I generally find those who are against political correctness are those who are racist, sexist or otherwise prejudiced and hate the fact they cannot express their prejudiced views without others calling them out for it. Does this describe you?

Wanting a strict dress code has nothing to do with political correctness. It has to do with promoting the best learning atmosphere possible.

I find those who support political correctness to be of the collectivist mindset who like to think they are the sharpest pencils in the box and they have convinced themselves they know what's best for everyone . They are control freaks and if you dare have a thought different from their view they label you racist, sexist etc. They either are incapable of seeing what they often propose as solutions or they just don't give a damn that their actions rob people of their liberties and freedom. They have earned the title "Thought Police" Does this describe you?

Forcing public school students to wear uniforms robs students of the freedom to express themselves. It has everything to do with Political Correctness. No one in this country including students should be forced to remove from their person something that is an expression of who they are as an INDIVIDUAL. There are cases being reported all over this country where students wearing things like shirts with American Flags, or supporting the NRA. wearing crucifixes, yamakas, or Muslim girls wearing head coverings being told to remove such items because someone has a problem with it. Most often what students are being forced to remove are directly related to their 1st Amendment rights.
 
I noticed one thing about the "people have to buy their kids school clothes now" argument about cost of uniforms that is being either overlooked or people don't realize. There are a lot of families that are poor that get their school clothes from relatives as hand-me-downs or go to thrift stores or look for the bargain clothes. Like Aunt said, school uniforms or even just restrictive dress codes require certain clothes that aren't necessarily (and in general likely aren't) going to be found in those situations. My family got a box of clothes every year or so from my great aunt in Michigan because her kids were a few years older than us and that was a major source of clothes for us. My siblings got very few new clothes. Most of theirs were hand-me-downs from the older kids. Even now with my kids, I shop at thrift stores and look for things on discount racks when buying clothes for them. I have boys, but I've seen plenty of stuff for girls that would be respectable. However, it isn't likely that you would find uniform items on such discount racks. And it also isn't likely that I would get their clothes for so cheap, even if buying them from the school. Plus, I would still have to buy clothes for them to wear after school and on days off. It isn't like this cuts down on costs, like some believe. And it really wouldn't cut down on time to get them dressed either if you are teaching your children to actually put their clothes away or pull out what they are going to wear the night before.

Now, I think that the discipline/increased learning is a benefit, but I don't think it is for every district. I think some districts do just fine without the need for a uniform. A simple dress code should do just fine for most areas and most people. There are certain districts where uniforms or a highly restrictive dress code would likely be very beneficial and should likely be implemented. But also, I think it should definitely include some that do not cost the school.

I don't think there would be much in the way of hiding the "haves" and "have nots" though, at least not in the older grades for the first few years of its implementation because these students already know each other. That knowledge won't go away just because there are uniforms. Plus, there are always going to be ways to identify those who don't have all that much money.

(Oh, and as for the restrictive hair cuts and hair colors thing, I think that is completely wrong. That should be a student's choice. Unless it is truly a distraction, such as hair that blocks vision or has offensive words/symbols in it, it should be allowed.)
 
I find those who support political correctness to be of the collectivist mindset who like to think they are the sharpest pencils in the box and they have convinced themselves they know what's best for everyone .
Or they simply think it's good to be respectful to people. You seem to disagree.

They are control freaks
Or they believe in treating people with respect.

and if you dare have a thought different from their view they label you racist, sexist etc.
Well...if the shoe fits....

They either are incapable of seeing what they often propose as solutions or they just don't give a damn that their actions rob people of their liberties and freedom. They have earned the title "Thought Police" Does this describe you?
:lol:

Let me see if I have this correct. You want to have the liberty and freedom to be insult an entire classification of people for no better reason than because they belong to that class, and yet you condemn those who exercise THEIR liberty and freedom to insult you for your specific actions.

Is that essentially what you're saying?

Forcing public school students to wear uniforms robs students of the freedom to express themselves.
No, it doesn't. I've already proven this statement false earlier in this thread. Expressing yourself is not limited to mass produced designer clothing. The school is not demanding the child be dressed to their standards 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Your argument here is simply false.

It has everything to do with Political Correctness.
No it doesn't. It has everything to do with promoting a better learning environment.

No one in this country including students should be forced to remove from their person something that is an expression of who they are as an INDIVIDUAL.
If your feeling of individuality is so external as to be tied up into the clothes you wear, I suggest you re-evaluate who you are as a person.

There are cases being reported all over this country where students wearing things like shirts with American Flags, or supporting the NRA. wearing crucifixes, yamakas, or Muslim girls wearing head coverings being told to remove such items because someone has a problem with it.
Or because it is causing a distraction to the learning environment.

Most often what students are being forced to remove are directly related to their 1st Amendment rights.
No it's not. But even if this was true, there's a common saying which is your rights end where mine begin. And if your clothing interferes with my right to an education, then you are no longer granted unlimited exercise of your rights.

You could not be more wrong if you tried.
 
I am old enough to remember having to go to school in a shirt, slacks and tie. The prime reasons we tried to get that changed was freedom of personal expression. That typically meant wearing jeans and a white t-shirt. Anyone else rememeber when T-shirts were all plain and white? LOL

I do. This was before jeans became the national uniform. You say to kids that jeans are a "uniform" of sorts, and they look at you as if you're crazy. But yes, Virginia, there was a time when "everybody" didn't wear jeans "everywhere." (Of course, I'm wearing jeans right now, LOL.)

As for kids expressing their individuality through their dress at school, that's not very important to me. They have plenty of opportunity to do so after school and on weekends. What I want when they're in school is for them to conform to the rules of behavior and to not be a distraction. I want them to learn. Coochie-cutters and ridiculously sagging pants and goth chains and etc. are a distraction.
 
Or they simply think it's good to be respectful to people. You seem to disagree.

Or they believe in treating people with respect.

Well...if the shoe fits....

:lol:

Let me see if I have this correct. You want to have the liberty and freedom to be insult an entire classification of people for no better reason than because they belong to that class, and yet you condemn those who exercise THEIR liberty and freedom to insult you for your specific actions.

Is that essentially what you're saying?

No, it doesn't. I've already proven this statement false earlier in this thread. Expressing yourself is not limited to mass produced designer clothing. The school is not demanding the child be dressed to their standards 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Your argument here is simply false.

No it doesn't. It has everything to do with promoting a better learning environment.

If your feeling of individuality is so external as to be tied up into the clothes you wear, I suggest you re-evaluate who you are as a person.

Or because it is causing a distraction to the learning environment.

No it's not. But even if this was true, there's a common saying which is your rights end where mine begin. And if your clothing interferes with my right to an education, then you are no longer granted unlimited exercise of your rights.

You could not be more wrong if you tried.

No you really don't have it correct you really don't have a clue. But thank you for your response as it is a steller examples of collectivist thought. Collectivism holds that, in human affairs, the collective—society, the community, the nation, the proletariat, the race, etc.—is the unit of reality and the standard of value. On this view, the individual has reality only as part of the group, and value only insofar as he serves it.
 
I find those who support political correctness to be of the collectivist mindset who like to think they are the sharpest pencils in the box and they have convinced themselves they know what's best for everyone . They are control freaks and if you dare have a thought different from their view they label you racist, sexist etc. They either are incapable of seeing what they often propose as solutions or they just don't give a damn that their actions rob people of their liberties and freedom. They have earned the title "Thought Police" Does this describe you?

Forcing public school students to wear uniforms robs students of the freedom to express themselves. It has everything to do with Political Correctness. No one in this country including students should be forced to remove from their person something that is an expression of who they are as an INDIVIDUAL. There are cases being reported all over this country where students wearing things like shirts with American Flags, or supporting the NRA. wearing crucifixes, yamakas, or Muslim girls wearing head coverings being told to remove such items because someone has a problem with it. Most often what students are being forced to remove are directly related to their 1st Amendment rights.
You had me with the first paragraph... and lost me with the second paragraph.

I do not believe that school uniforms has anything to do with PC. In fact, it is baffling that the other poster even brought up that aspect, unless he was trying to shame people with opinions that differed from his own into submission... which is a classic PC tactic, as you correctly point out.
 
You had me with the first paragraph... and lost me with the second paragraph.

I do not believe that school uniforms has anything to do with PC. In fact, it is baffling that the other poster even brought up that aspect, unless he was trying to shame people with opinions that differed from his own into submission... which is a classic PC tactic, as you correctly point out.

Maybe our definitions of PC differ. Some hold it to basically be related to race and gender. And if that is the case then my post isn't going to make sense. PC has become a tool of censorship. When you have to censor your own words and thoughts or even your clothes to accommodate to someone else's sensitiveness over anything from politics to religion, then you no longer have the right to express yourself freely. We are now at the point where bad manners are a crime punishable by law. I understand the need for some type of dress code in public schools but to force them to wear uniforms combined with the censorship of their words and thoughts takes away just about every means of expression they have.
 
Both true. You also don't need meaty tomato sauce on your spaghetti noodles, but doesn't it make it so much better?

Considering my argument is about maintaining choice and yours is about having absolutely no choice it would seem to me that if you desire me to have meaty tomato sauce you would require I have it while I would say you can have it with or without the sauce.

You would say everyone benefits from people eating meaty sauce and therefore everyone will eat meaty sauce while I would say it is desirable you eat meaty sauce but aren't required to do so.
 
Maybe our definitions of PC differ. Some hold it to basically be related to race and gender. And if that is the case then my post isn't going to make sense. PC has become a tool of censorship. When you have to censor your own words and thoughts or even your clothes to accommodate to someone else's sensitiveness over anything from politics to religion, then you no longer have the right to express yourself freely. We are now at the point where bad manners are a crime punishable by law. I understand the need for some type of dress code in public schools but to force them to wear uniforms combined with the censorship of their words and thoughts takes away just about every means of expression they have.

"Tool of censorship". I had never heard that phrase before. I like it. Completely agree. And that is exactly what whatshisname was trying to do, in a backhanded way, IMO.

I disagree, though, that uniforms for school age kids qualifies as censorship.
 
I think all 18-21 y/o females should wear them.....
 
I do. This was before jeans became the national uniform. You say to kids that jeans are a "uniform" of sorts, and they look at you as if you're crazy. But yes, Virginia, there was a time when "everybody" didn't wear jeans "everywhere." (Of course, I'm wearing jeans right now, LOL.)

As for kids expressing their individuality through their dress at school, that's not very important to me. They have plenty of opportunity to do so after school and on weekends. What I want when they're in school is for them to conform to the rules of behavior and to not be a distraction. I want them to learn. Coochie-cutters and ridiculously sagging pants and goth chains and etc. are a distraction.

Oh, I support school uniforms. As you can see by my post #74 on page 8: http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/168538-do-you-support-school-uniforms-8.html

…and my post #152 on page 16: http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/168538-do-you-support-school-uniforms-16.html

My last post was just a response about why kids were pushing for change back in the day. I didn’t mean to imply we were “right” back then, just what we thought was right at that age.
 
I not only support school uniforms, but object to schools above the elementary level hiring custodians, cooks and groundskeepers. The kids should be pressed into labor to supply those functions.

I also think that high school dropouts should be barred from voting in federal elections. I'm not averse to all high school kids being required to take some military training either. School should be really serious business, with serious responsibilities and serious consequences.
 
I noticed one thing about the "people have to buy their kids school clothes now" argument about cost of uniforms that is being either overlooked or people don't realize. There are a lot of families that are poor that get their school clothes from relatives as hand-me-downs or go to thrift stores or look for the bargain clothes. Like Aunt said, school uniforms or even just restrictive dress codes require certain clothes that aren't necessarily (and in general likely aren't) going to be found in those situations. My family got a box of clothes every year or so from my great aunt in Michigan because her kids were a few years older than us and that was a major source of clothes for us. My siblings got very few new clothes. Most of theirs were hand-me-downs from the older kids. Even now with my kids, I shop at thrift stores and look for things on discount racks when buying clothes for them. I have boys, but I've seen plenty of stuff for girls that would be respectable. However, it isn't likely that you would find uniform items on such discount racks. And it also isn't likely that I would get their clothes for so cheap, even if buying them from the school. Plus, I would still have to buy clothes for them to wear after school and on days off. It isn't like this cuts down on costs, like some believe. And it really wouldn't cut down on time to get them dressed either if you are teaching your children to actually put their clothes away or pull out what they are going to wear the night before.

Now, I think that the discipline/increased learning is a benefit, but I don't think it is for every district. I think some districts do just fine without the need for a uniform. A simple dress code should do just fine for most areas and most people. There are certain districts where uniforms or a highly restrictive dress code would likely be very beneficial and should likely be implemented. But also, I think it should definitely include some that do not cost the school.

I don't think there would be much in the way of hiding the "haves" and "have nots" though, at least not in the older grades for the first few years of its implementation because these students already know each other. That knowledge won't go away just because there are uniforms. Plus, there are always going to be ways to identify those who don't have all that much money.

(Oh, and as for the restrictive hair cuts and hair colors thing, I think that is completely wrong. That should be a student's choice. Unless it is truly a distraction, such as hair that blocks vision or has offensive words/symbols in it, it should be allowed.)

Hmm. Some good points here I hadn't thought about. Much better than any of the other points "against" that I've read so far. :)
 
I think they're a great idea for most schools.

They boost integration and respect and I also think they should be free of charge for the parents initially. Each student should have 3 (random number > 1) school uniforms given by the school at the sizes of the student and if the parents want additional school uniforms, they should pay for them.

So what do you think?

If someone forced me as a kid to wear a uniform I would have hated their guts. Just sayin'..
 
If someone forced me as a kid to wear a uniform I would have hated their guts. Just sayin'..

You would have probably hated their guts for providing a limited lunch menu instead of a vast buffet where you could have unlimited choice to your heart's desire.
 
I support eliminating socialized schools, and then people could choose whether they want to school with uniforms or a school without uniforms.
 
You would have probably hated their guts for providing a limited lunch menu instead of a vast buffet where you could have unlimited choice to your heart's desire.

I never ate lunch provided in high school. There was an ice cream shop right down the road next to a burger joint. I would drop in and get a burger and finish it off with some ice cream. A hell of a lot better than whatever the **** they were serving at school. Ewww. As for the other grades, I would bring my own lunch.
 
No you really don't have it correct you really don't have a clue. But thank you for your response as it is a steller examples of collectivist thought. Collectivism holds that, in human affairs, the collective—society, the community, the nation, the proletariat, the race, etc.—is the unit of reality and the standard of value. On this view, the individual has reality only as part of the group, and value only insofar as he serves it.
Right, you should be able to say any hateful thing about a class of citizens based solely upon their membership (voluntary or involuntary) to that class, but no one should be allowed to say anything hateful to you for your specific actions.

In other words, everyone should have freedom of speech, and "everyone" means everyone who thinks just like you. Got it. So you go on spouting your ridiculous nonsense to justify the hypocritical nature of your outrage and I'll be over here noting said hypocrisy.
Considering my argument is about maintaining choice and yours is about having absolutely no choice
Absolutely there is a choice. You have the choice to move to a different district. You have the choice to pay out-of-district tuition. You have the choice to enroll in a different school.

Or, in the case of my school, you have the choice of different colors for both your shirt and bottoms. Wear whatever shoes you'd like, so long as they are not flip flops.

You have plenty of choices.

it would seem to me that if you desire me to have meaty tomato sauce you would require I have it while I would say you can have it with or without the sauce.
Ahh, but if we were sharing this meal and we both like meaty tomato sauce, would we not have it? If I demand it and you enjoy it but don't demand it, we still have it and we both agree it tastes better.

Dress codes make the learning environment better. Is it necessary for order? No, but it certainly helps. Is meaty tomato sauce necessary for good spaghetti? No, but it certainly helps.

You would say everyone benefits from people eating meaty sauce and therefore everyone will eat meaty sauce while I would say it is desirable you eat meaty sauce but aren't required to do so.
And if everyone benefits from dress code/meat sauce, it seems pretty clear to me what we should have for dinner.
 
Back
Top Bottom