Create an opposing argument for the following claim: Children under age 10 should not have a cell phone because they are not responsible enough to care for and properly handle this type of technology.

In a way they should and should not

Explanation:

The reason I think that they should is because if something happens and they need help they need to have someone to call or text especially if it is an emergency. Most kids under the age of ten are actually smart the age I think that should have phones are maybe 7 and older.

Children under the age of 10 should have a cell phone because, under the right guidance, they can learn the importance of it. It shows them that you trust them with important things and it may impact their behavior towards a parent or guardian.

Another reason they should have a cell phone is that it provides a form of protection. Some parents and guardians let their children out on their own at a very young age. Without protection, the child has a higher risk of getting kidnapped or hurt.

I hope this will help you. ^^

normally working animals are domesticated and ruled by a master, a domesticator (tamer), to perform basic and important functions on a farm, for example. the value used in this context is animal labor in exchange for food. it is not so much a contrast to the story told by napoleon and the pigs, since the animals of that particular farm also performed functions on the farm through domestication. the only thing is that in this case, who rules them is a pig, also an animal, but very respected, to whom the other animals lent him submission. that's about a strong relationship of dependency between animal and owner.

i dont know doing this for points