But if what appeal to kids are junkfood, the healthy foods you mentioned aren't going to be consumed and therefore zilch benefit will be reaped, won't it?

My main idea there was not about sugar rushes but rather, intermittent consumption of junkfood can provide energy needed by children in breaks for example, to continue the day.

Also, it didn't occur to me to advocate obesity and diabetes, what I was against is simply the banning of junkfood. Very explicitly saying, Junkfood should therefore NOT be banned from public schools. (notice I'm not saying getting fat is therefore good)

My stand's pretty simple actually: Junkfood should not be banned because children are free to eat what they want to (measures should be implemented to exercise control, of course) and junkfood in small amounts definitely can provide energy for these children's day. (That's it. Don't read too far into it)

No they should not be longer. On average, students are already spending 7-8 hours in schools daily. To remain focussed across this long span of time is evidently a tough deal for many kids out there, look at how often students doze off or become talkative because none of that knowledge is going in. Students are also bogged down by tonnes of assignments and projects that are to be done out of curriculum time. To increase time spent for curriculum would mean less time left aside for such assignments, students will feel the pressure the work round the clock and this deprives them of sleep or other activities that are crucial for healthy development especially in youths. Longer curriculum hours can imply a bigger scope of syllabus covered within this span of time and teachers as a result issue MORE assignments. Students have even less time now, for both school work and themselves!

The main idea of a school afterall is to equip youths with the knowledge applicable to keep society working and seek to improve mankind as a whole, not work everyone out such that it becomes a mad rat race for all students out there, vying for top positions in classes and cases of resorting to cheating or other unpleasant behaviour to secure top spots arise. This is an ultimate irony, schools are suppose to promote importance of moral values but this insane competition is driving students desperate. Sadly this is becoming more prevalent, a result of long school days, increasing difficulty in syllabus, increasing amounts of assignments, less time for students' own reflection, time and space.

Yes they should. Many would dispute that giving out condoms is the equivalent of advocating pre-marital sex. But youngsters are youngsters, we all are hot-blooded. As much as youths are rash and irrational at times, I'm sure at this time and age, majority of youths living in developed/developing areas are well educated in sex. There will be youths who exercise abstinence and I'm sure something as small as a condom wouldn't sway their stand on abstaining from pre-marital sex if given to them in school.

As for the high school students who are more than willing to engage in pre-marital sex, measures have already been done to dissuade them from doing it. Think sex education in schools, think statistics about HIV and abortion rates overtly thrown in the faces of these youngsters, think pictures of repercussions of sexually transmitted diseases often shown to mature high school students. These measures I feel are done enough to deter students from engaging in casual sex but if they insist, condoms now will come in handy.

The condoms can help to reduce risks of becoming pregnant and transmission of STDs and all of the problems that will come subsequently to both the society and to the students.

Condoms should not be seen as a tool of promoting sex but rather, the problem preventor (if there is such a word).

the main idea of wearing uniform is to show of students' sense of belonging and loyalty to a school. School teachers are definitely not confined by this principle because first of all, they are there to provide a service to the school, they ought to have the freedom to at the very least choose what they wanna wear. Second, teachers are free to resign anyway so why should they be confined by the dress code of the school that primarily aims to show belonging, unity and equality. Bringing me to my next point, teachers have authority over students, hence the intrinsic status inequality. All of which already defeat the whole purpose of making teachers wear school uniform.

First of all, students ought to have a variety of food to choose from in schools. When students are in schools they face tremendous stress from homework, assignments and whatnots. Why deprive them of one of the few incentives to come to school that is to have some awesome deep fried food or sweet-tasting chocolate brownies?! Why confine them to eating what is socially perceived as healthy but utterly bland? So authoritative. For all we know, the high energy (junk) food can be effective in maintaining students' enthusiasm in class, think sugar rush!