Need Hive Perspective

[nelewaf]

My dd's debate class had the topic of abortion recently, and a few Mom's chose to keep their dc home, because this is an issue that I prefer to cover in my home w/ my dd, and not have to have her debate it. Her is 14 yrs old. The teacher is continuing this next week - ugh! And we have to pay for the class even if we don't go, as per her contract.

 

What do you think ? Is this a fair debate topic? The ages of the class, boys and girls range 12 to 16 yrs old. Some of the older students asked for this topic.

 

Thanks in advance for your insights!

[PachiSusan]

I believe it is a fair topic *IF* both sides are presented and valued equally.

[Jean in Newcastle]

It is an appropriate subject for debate with information on both sides. It is good to be able to learn both sides and to be able to argue intelligently. Was there no list of the kinds of things debated when you signed up for the class?

[nelewaf]

It is an appropriate subject for debate with information on both sides. It is good to be able to learn both sides and to be able to argue intelligently. Was there no list of the kinds of things debated when you signed up for the class?

 

 

No, there was not a list of topics when we signed up in August 2012.

 

Do you see any problem with the rather young ages of the debaters? Wouldn't you agree that 12, 13 and 14 yrs old is a bit young to be debating about abortion?

[nelewaf]

I believe it is a fair topic *IF* both sides are presented and valued equally.

 

Thanks for the reply. Agree that it is a fair topic to debate, but at what age?

 

I know my dd, and she is a bit uncomfortable with the topic, "now" . If she was 16 or 17 yrs old, I'd have to think she would be much, much more mature and ready for this particular topic.

[Julie of KY]

Personally, I'd keep my kids home.

 

That said, it is an important skill to be able to present an arguement and debate. Are they split and told to argue the side assigned or are they told to argue their beliefs?

[nelewaf]

Also, I guess what I'm also asking is :

 

for young adults with very impressionable minds, aren't there some topics that we, as parents and teachers want to think about more thoroughly to discuss privately now or always?

 

I, as a parent, am very comfortable with filtering these topics, and will. Just wanted to get others thoughts, insights and perhaps experiences w/ this filtering of topics.

 

Plus there are soooo many other great topics to debate!!

 

Thanks for the replies!

 

Oh, doi you think the public schools allow abortion to be debated? If so, at what age(s)?

[PachiSusan]

No, there was not a list of topics when we signed up in August 2012.

 

Do you see any problem with the rather young ages of the debaters? Wouldn't you agree that 12, 13 and 14 yrs old is a bit young to be debating about abortion?

 

Actually, I don't think it's too young. They're getting sex education in 1st grade. They're getting all sorts of information about birth control and sex by this age and I think they need to know about the fact that sex leads to pregnancy and children. I think if they're old enough to hear about sex, they're old enough to hear about the consequences.

[regentrude]

I do not think that they are too young to debate abortion.

Unless they are completely sheltered from the world they must have already come across the issue, since it is an issue in political debate and election campaigns.

And since they are old enough that they could have sex (not necessarily out of their own choice) and become pregnant , the topic should be discussed.

[nelewaf]

Personally, I'd keep my kids home.

 

That said, it is an important skill to be able to present an arguement and debate. Are they split and told to argue the side assigned or are they told to argue their beliefs?

Julie of KY,

 

I believe the sides were assigned, in order to be able to debate both sides.

 

Yes, debating is an important skill, not disputing the actual skill of debate at all. I am balking at the topic, abortion. In order to be pregnant, one has to be sexually active, etc. These are words, topics I don't want my 14 dd hearing, thinking about or expressing. She's 14. At that age I was not thinking of these things.......no way.

[regentrude]

for young adults with very impressionable minds, aren't there some topics that we, as parents and teachers want to think about more thoroughly to discuss privately now or always?

I, as a parent, am very comfortable with filtering these topics, and will. Just wanted to get others thoughts, insights and perhaps experiences w/ this filtering of topics.

 

My teenagers are actually thinking thoroughly about issues like this, and we are talking about it in the family - but that does not mean they have to have the same opinion as I do. DD most definitely does not, and has not for several years. She is very articulate when she debates her point of view.

I do not believe filtering topics in teenagers works unless they are locked in the house and not allowed to access other sources of information. I much rather they are engaged in debate, see several sides of an issue, and form their own opinion.

Especially since young people have "impressionable minds", as you say it is important that they are not indoctrinated in any way but given the information to decide for themselves.

 

ETA: Just to clarify: talking about sex does not make a teenager want to engage in sexual activity. None of my teens have the slightest interest. But for many teens, the first sexual activity is not really planned (and as I said before, for a very large portion especially of the very young teens who end up pregnant, not even voluntary). So the education and discussions should come beforehand.

[PachiSusan]

Also, I guess what I'm also asking is :

 

for young adults with very impressionable minds, aren't there some topics that we, as parents and teachers want to think about more thoroughly to discuss privately now or always?

 

I, as a parent, am very comfortable with filtering these topics, and will. Just wanted to get others thoughts, insights and perhaps experiences w/ this filtering of topics.

 

Plus there are soooo many other great topics to debate!!

 

Thanks for the replies!

 

Oh, doi you think the public schools allow abortion to be debated? If so, at what age(s)?

 

I used to think that way until I saw some statistics that showed just how YOUNG children are having sex. We don't have the luxury of waiting IMO...and I'm SUPER SUPER conservative. We've already at 10 talked in depth about abortion with our daughter.

 

As to if pubic schools would allow abortion to be debated, I think so. There are more than religious reasons to be for or against it.

 

I would assume that a debate class would have the hotly debated issues of the day involved in it somehow.

[Jane in NC]

Yes, debating is an important skill, not disputing the actual skill of debate at all. I am balking at the topic, abortion. In order to be pregnant, one has to be sexually active, etc. These are words, topics I don't want my 14 dd hearing, thinking about or expressing. She's 14. At that age I was not thinking of these things.......no way.

Unfortunately too many fourteen year old teens are sexually active. She is not too young to hear the words "pregnant" or "sex". I fear not discussing important issues can lead to dire consequences.

[WishboneDawn]

Julie of KY,

 

I believe the sides were assigned, in order to be able to debate both sides.

 

Yes, debating is an important skill, not disputing the actual skill of debate at all. I am balking at the topic, abortion. In order to be pregnant, one has to be sexually active, etc. These are words, topics I don't want my 14 dd hearing, thinking about or expressing. She's 14. At that age I was not thinking of these things.......no way.

 

You may not have but lots of kids that age are. *shrug* I don't think there's anything wrong with it as a topic. If it bothers you personally and you want to withdraw her from that class then that's your prerogative as her parent but I think it's more a case of your values clashing with theirs rather then them doing anything particularily shocking or bad.

[PachiSusan]

Julie of KY,

 

I believe the sides were assigned, in order to be able to debate both sides.

 

Yes, debating is an important skill, not disputing the actual skill of debate at all. I am balking at the topic, abortion. In order to be pregnant, one has to be sexually active, etc. These are words, topics I don't want my 14 dd hearing, thinking about or expressing. She's 14. At that age I was not thinking of these things.......no way.

 

Many Middle schoolers in America are sexually active. Granted, not the norm, but the average age for a girl losing her virginity the last time I checked was 15.6 years old. Not too far away from your daughter's age.

[nelewaf]

I do not think that they are too young to debate abortion.

Unless they are completely sheltered from the world they must have already come across the issue, since it is an issue in political debate and election campaigns.

And since they are old enough that they could have sex (not necessarily out of their own choice) and become pregnant , the topic should be discussed.

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Agree, that 12, 13 and 14 yr olds should know about the topic, what abortion is. But respectfully disagree that the topic should be debated, at these young ages. That is the issue - the appropriate age for debate (not just discussion/knowing what it is)

 

I guess what I think is appropriate differs from others, and that's Ok ! This is what makes us all unique!

[Lang Syne Boardie]

12, 13, and 14yo children are having sex in this country. If our tweens and teens are not, they may still likely have friends who are. I support a parent's right to opt her child out of this assignment if she doesn't trust the teachers and coaches to handle it respectfully, but I believe it is an appropriate topic generally. I certainly believe it is an appropriate topic for public school debate classes; ps kids are not sheltered from sex or the consequences and information is good.

[regentrude]

Agree, that 12, 13 and 14 yr olds should know about the topic, what abortion is. But respectfully disagree that the topic should be debated, at these young ages. That is the issue - the appropriate age for debate (not just discussion/knowing what it is)

 

So you don't think 13 or 14 year olds can have a very strong opinion about the topic and be capable of defending their point of view?

Or do you object to them hearing viewpoints that differ from yours?

Not sure what exactly the issue is. (We have debated the issue quite frequently at our house.)

[purplelily]

It is an appropriate subject for debate with information on both sides. It is good to be able to learn both sides and to be able to argue intelligently. Was there no list of the kinds of things debated when you signed up for the class?

 

Has anyone made a list topics to include on the abortion debate? When does life begin? When is life viable outside the womb?

Have they watched a video showing a baby's development? Who profits from the abortion? What happens to a woman's body after an abortion? What happens to a woman's mental health? Should abortion be used as birth control? The U.S.Constitution talks about our posperity, how is posperity defined? Does having a child really harm the mother's health? Who was Margret Sanger? What did she say about birth control? Why do women get abortions? Do men suffer from an abortion? What happens to aborted felt tissue, is it sold for profit? Does Planned Parent give lose dose birth control pills? How much money does the US government spend on abortion? What do you think of Live Action videos? Does a woman have a right to full informed consent, as to all the future medical problems with an abortion? Why are some children valued and others are not?

Why is a bird egg value able, and a preborn child is not? Who performs the abortion, and do they have hospital priveleges?

Have they investigated the Gianna Jesson story? Should women be able to control what happens to their bodies, for their own happiness? Should people be expected to take responsibilities for their actions?

 

I agree this topic needs to be debated, but you also need to be able to allow for your child's sensitivities. Some young people are not ready for these type of issues. Could the younger students of the class meet another day to debate a less controversial topic?

[laughing lioness]

Since it's such a hot news/ political topic I think it's fine. It's not like the kids haven't been exposed to the term before. And with some of the recent news, I think it's totally apropos. Our kids did a grisly murder in 7th grade mock trial....I think the logic stage is a great time to intro the kids to some of the seedier sides of life (this coming from a G rated girl) because they are very receptive and wanting to share, get your ideas, opinions, etc.

[Jane in NC]

Another thing is that the students asked to debate this topic which tells me that it is particularly relevant to them.

[nelewaf]

Unfortunately too many fourteen year old teens are sexually active. She is not too young to hear the words "pregnant" or "sex". I fear not discussing important issues can lead to dire consequences.

 

Of course my 14 dd is not too young to hear the words "pregnant" or "sex". I never said that.

I do not dispute that kids of this age should know these things. How silly. But knowing what some of these things are and discussing them is one thing. Debating them are very different. I am asking about debating the topic and thus the issues, ideas, situations surrounding the need of abortion.

[PachiSusan]

You bring up some very important issues around the abortion debate. Awesome!!

 

I also agree with the bolded - perhaps the ones on the younger side could debate some *part* of the abortion debate - like when they think life begins. Less grisly and better for the sensitive.

 

Has anyone made a list topics to include on the abortion debate? When does life begin? When is life viable outside the womb?

Have they watched a video showing a baby's development? Who profits from the abortion? What happens to a woman's body after an abortion? What happens to a woman's mental health? Should abortion be used as birth control? The U.S.Constitution talks about our posperity, how is posperity defined? Does having a child really harm the mother's health? Who was Margret Sanger? What did she say about birth control? Why do women get abortions? Do men suffer from an abortion? What happens to aborted felt tissue, is it sold for profit? Does Planned Parent give lose dose birth control pills? How much money does the US government spend on abortion? What do you think of Live Action videos? Does a woman have a right to full informed consent, as to all the future medical problems with an abortion? Why are some children valued and others are not?

Why is a bird egg value able, and a preborn child is not? Who performs the abortion, and do they have hospital priveleges?

Have they investigated the Gianna Jesson story? Should women be able to control what happens to their bodies, for their own happiness? Should people be expected to take responsibilities for their actions?

 

I agree this topic needs to be debated, but you also need to be able to allow for your child's sensitivities. Some young people are not ready for these type of issues. Could the younger students of the class meet another day to debate a less controversial topic?

 

[PachiSusan]

I am asking about debating the topic and thus the issues, ideas, situations surrounding the need of abortion.

 

 

Isn't that equally important to the discussion? I don't see how debating them would be more hurtful to them than discussing it with their parents.

[PeterPan]

Julie of KY,

 

I believe the sides were assigned, in order to be able to debate both sides.

 

Yes, debating is an important skill, not disputing the actual skill of debate at all. I am balking at the topic, abortion. In order to be pregnant, one has to be sexually active, etc. These are words, topics I don't want my 14 dd hearing, thinking about or expressing. She's 14. At that age I was not thinking of these things.......no way.

 

 

I'm sorry, but when ARE you going to talk about it?? She's 14. Means she's leaving home in 3-4 years. So you're going to talk about it this year but not next? And is s*x the only angle you see in this or think they're discussing? You don't think it has to do at all with ethics and understanding where people are coming from and different viewpoints? What does it teach when you pull her out, that there are certain topics we're EMBARRASSED about??

 

Nope, I'd put her in the class, and I'd sit my butt RIGHT THERE as the parent and listen to the whole thing. That way you know exactly what's going on and can talk with her about it. And if your schedule at the co-op or whatever doesn't normally allow that, you get a sub and make it happen. Just because you didn't want that discussion then didn't mean it's not timely or appropriate. If it's not on her mind, it sure is on the minds of her peers and those a year or two older than her. It sure BETTER have gone through her mind when that handsome 16 yo guy asks her for a date. These are terribly, terribly important issues to come to terms with, and there's NO better time and place than with your parents there, in the room, ready to talk about it. The WORST thing you can do is leave the discussion to a college dorm a few years from now. Cuz believe me, it's gonna happen there. Where I went to high school (residential), there was plenty of everything, including t-shirts to the effect of Bush out of my bush. (sorry) Every argument you figure shouldn't be made, kids at 16 have thought about. I had friends telling me you couldn't know when life began, it was only tissue, blah blah. And these were intelligent kids! This is not the time to shelter. This is the time to TEACH.

 

And no, as teacher *I* wouldn't have put it up as a topic for debate, because I don't think it's healthy for students to try to defend something that doesn't have an ethical defense (my opinion, sorry). But once you're in that position, you make lemonade. That's why I would sit in the class and debrief mightily.

[Jane in NC]

Of course my 14 dd is not too young to hear the words "pregnant" or "sex". I never said that.

I do not dispute that kids of this age should know these things. How silly. But knowing what some of these things are and discussing them is one thing. Debating them are very different. I am asking about debating the topic and thus the issues, ideas, situations surrounding the need of abortion.

 

 

Excuse me. My comment was a reaction to your earlier comment. You wrote:

 

Yes, debating is an important skill, not disputing the actual skill of debate at all. I am balking at the topic, abortion. In order to be pregnant, one has to be sexually active, etc. These are words, topics I don't want my 14 dd hearing, thinking about or expressing. She's 14. At that age I was not thinking of these things.......no way.

 

Perhaps you now understand why I reacted as I did??

[nelewaf]

Another thing is that the students asked to debate this topic which tells me that it is particularly relevant to them.

 

Jane,

in a class of 14, two of the older 16 yr olds asked to debate the topic. The 12 13, 14 yr olds did not say a thing. No one else said a word, except one student who did not want to debate the topic.

[PeterPan]

 

Isn't that equally important to the discussion? I don't see how debating them would be more hurtful to them than discussing it with their parents.

 

 

The difference is that when you debate, you're causing a young, naive student to open his mind to the idea that there IS an ethical defense. It's a subtle thing you did to his mind. I wouldn't have done it, not from an educational perspective. If you have a discussion, you can examine the sides but take a position. Some things are debatable and have sides that reasonable people can argue either way and not violate their consciences. But this particular issue is different.

[nelewaf]

Original poster signing off......thanks for the perspectives. Much appreciated.

Haven't been on here for some time. Just wanted to chat a bit. Thanks again.

[PeterPan]

Jane,

in a class of 14, two of the older 16 yr olds asked to debate the topic. The 12 13, 14 yr olds did not say a thing. No one else said a word, except one student who did not want to debate the topic.

 

 

You know what's curious about this is that age spread, as you're saying. Kids in that 12-13 bracket really wouldn't have abortion on their radar unless it has come up in their world. Seems more appropriate for 14 (young) to 18. But you know, I remember being 15 and feeling very passionately about the topic. For junior high though, that's sorta odd. And it's weird that the teacher is letting the direction of the class be decided in that way. There are so many interesting topics those ages can debate that do have positions equally, ethically arguable from both sides. I got a whole book of prompts like that and have done some quite enjoyably with dd. It certainly wasn't necessary to get into this realm, not when it's something that's really hard to be happy that your kid is arguing in the affirmative. :(

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Are you familiar with the idea of the Devil's Advocate. It is the idea that only through debating the best and strongest arguments of the opposition does one hone ones own argument to the keenest edge. Or to put it in chess terms black has to play their best game too.

 

Someone has to take the pro abortion side if you are going to have the debate. And it may be that famiarity with the side you oppose will give better insight to the weaknesses of that position as well as insight into the chinks in your own.

 

Fwiw the idea that there are some topics too repulsive to debate is one reason why there is a Christian debate league. On the other hand it has the side effect of pulling many talented Christian debaters out of the broader debate world. So it might end up that the earnest debaters on the other side hear less well researched and argued positions from a pro life viewpoint. Just some things to consider.

 

Given the news of the day I have been having many conversations with my kids that I'd rather avoid. But my job entails discussions of abortion, marriage, human trafficking, rape and prostitution as well as the wonders of marriage to a well matched partner. I know some gritty conversations happen on scout outings and there isn't a magical age of readiness. It is a continuum of little conversations.

[PachiSusan]

 

The difference is that when you debate, you're causing a young, naive student to open his mind to the idea that there IS an ethical defense. It's a subtle thing you did to his mind. I wouldn't have done it, not from an educational perspective. If you have a discussion, you can examine the sides but take a position. Some things are debatable and have sides that reasonable people can argue either way and not violate their consciences. But this particular issue is different.

 

 

After reading that they might have to take a side they don't believe in, I can see how it might be hurtful. Don't we want our kids minds to open up to see BOTH sides?

 

I'm torn...I see your point, but I also see just how uneducated our children seem to be about really important matters because we as parents think they're just "TOO YOUNG" to hear THAT...and I think sometimes we baby them just a little too much. Sometimes Melissa's perspectives - so pure and true, challenge MY perceptions and help me to see things differently.

[PeterPan]

After reading that they might have to take a side they don't believe in, I can see how it might be hurtful. Don't we want our kids minds to open up to see BOTH sides?

 

 

There's a time to everything. There are things that mature adults can calmly debate that impressionable, not solidly mature in their faith teens are not ready to. The other alternative in a situation like that is for the teacher wisely to say SHE will take the pro-abortion position and assign the students categories for their side. That way each child gets an age-appropriate aspect to study and no student is taking the (not really age-appropriate) position of defending something that almost no parent there is likely to want the dc to be defending. There ARE ways to do this that are educationally sound.

[ktgrok]

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Agree, that 12, 13 and 14 yr olds should know about the topic, what abortion is. But respectfully disagree that the topic should be debated, at these young ages. That is the issue - the appropriate age for debate (not just discussion/knowing what it is)

 

I guess what I think is appropriate differs from others, and that's Ok ! This is what makes us all unique!

 

 

I agree with you. I think this is too emotional a topic for 12 year olds to be debating. This could really traumatize some of the kids. And as most of the arguments are ethical/religious I don't think anyone ever really changes their mind on this from a debate anyway. I am very liberal compared to most parents on this board and i wouldn't want my child participating.

[Candid]

We participate in NCFCA team policy debate. This year's topic was the UN. Students pick their own cases under the general topic. In this league, participants can be as young as twelve. When you arrive in a room to debate and you are assigned negative, you are stuck with whatever topic the other team picked out.

 

My ds initially debated a peace keeping case, let's just say some of the evidence was about rape and pretty ugly. Other teams chose trafficking, also a case with tough evidence.

 

So my general opinion is this was well within the parameters of debate both in terms of age and topic.

 

I do have questions about why you would have a debate class with rotating topics as that is not how debate works. It defeats the research aspect and the element of creation and surprise that you get in writing affirmative cases.

[Jean in Newcastle]

No, there was not a list of topics when we signed up in August 2012.

 

Do you see any problem with the rather young ages of the debaters? Wouldn't you agree that 12, 13 and 14 yrs old is a bit young to be debating about abortion?

 

 

No, I don't. But honestly, debate requires certain critical thinking abilities that many 12 year olds would not be ready for. I probably would not sign up my kids for debate at that age because I don't think they could look at controversial subjects critically. I would think a debate class that did not deal with controversial topics to be rather lame.

[katilac]

I would be pretty surprised if abortion didn't come up as a possible debate topic. Unless the class or club specifically states otherwise, I would pretty much expect to see abortion, the death penalty, euthanasia, and so on.

 

The idea of an introductory course for younger teens that stays in safer waters is not completely without merit, but would certainly be limited in scope. Because this isn't that type of course, I would not be surprised at any topics that are tackled.

[Harriet Vane]

I have a 16yo dd, and I have been teaching literature, Bible, or history classes to groups of teens for the last several years (at least 4+).

 

I have no issues with this debate topic for those ages.

 

The only topic I would have issues with is one that includes graphic and gratuitously detailed descriptions of s@x or violent acts.

[G5052]

Yes, fair topic. FWIW, Veritas Press covers this in their Omnibus I program, which is for that age range.

[Candid]

The only topic I would have issues with is one that includes graphic and gratuitously detailed descriptions of s@x or violent acts.

 

 

In real debate you can get in trouble for this, especially if you have a boatload of evidence.

[Pawz4me]

I would have no problem at all with my 14 yo DS participating in a debate about abortion, regardless of which side he was arguing. It and all the various issues surrounding sex are things we've discussed with him for years now. And he hears/reads about abortion and related topics on the news every day.

 

But I do wonder a bit about the age range of that class. There's such a huge difference between most 12 year olds and most 16 year olds. I think it would have been better to split into two classes. Maybe one for 12-14 and one for 14-16, with the parents of the 14s picking which class their child would best fit in.

[LisaKinVA]

We participate in NCFCA team policy debate. This year's topic was the UN. Students pick their own cases under the general topic. In this league, participants can be as young as twelve. When you arrive in a room to debate and you are assigned negative, you are stuck with whatever topic the other team picked out.

 

My ds initially debated a peace keeping case, let's just say some of the evidence was about rape and pretty ugly. Other teams chose trafficking, also a case with tough evidence.

 

So my general opinion is this was well within the parameters of debate both in terms of age and topic.

 

I do have questions about why you would have a debate class with rotating topics as that is not how debate works. It defeats the research aspect and the element of creation and surprise that you get in writing affirmative cases.

 

 

This technique is employed often at the college and high school level, to give one experience in the area of debate, with various types of topics (tax policy, foreign policy, domestic policy, legal policy, military policy), as many of these are researched and argued differently. The purpose of this class is exposure, not fine-tuning the minutia of argumentation, or delving deep into a single topic area. It is actually easier for younger students to debate a few topics in a smaller way, than to have them consider a broad range of possible topics and all of the tangents that topic might touch.

 

Also, I'd hazard a guess that the format used in this class doesn't follow a typical policy or LD round.

 

Now, to the question at hand...I do not believe 12 or 13 is too young, generally, for addressing this topic (there may be exceptions). I know that we did in a very conservative Christian school, as part of health class in 1980). I am seeing some very strident positions taken by tweens and teens, who are giving no thought to these positions (usually parroting, but in very judgmental, and immature manners), nor are many of these young people encouraged to explore the "why" of what they believe. The fear I've heard, more often than not, is that causing young people to study or reason through, or listen to the "other" side will make them abandon their faith.

 

At this age, we need to be diving in alongside our children, helping them unlock the keys to research and argumentation, guiding them through difficult topics of the day, not trying to put up walls, praying they won't "hear such things" until they are older.

 

And yes, if anyone is wondering, I have taught and coached speech and debate at both the high school and collegiate level, even within NCFCA (and I still can't believe it's standard to spend the first 2-3 minutes of a 7 minute 1AC reading definitions...and yes, I do believe definitions are important, just not as important)

[PeterPan]

I am seeing some very strident positions taken by tweens and teens, who are giving no thought to these positions (usually parroting, but in very judgmental, and immature manners), nor are many of these young people encouraged to explore the "why" of what they believe. The fear I've heard, more often than not, is that causing young people to study or reason through, or listen to the "other" side will make them abandon their faith.

 

At this age, we need to be diving in alongside our children, helping them unlock the keys to research and argumentation, guiding them through difficult topics of the day, not trying to put up walls, praying they won't "hear such things" until they are older.

 

If someone *isn't* doing debate, do you think there's a list of topics or resources they ought to be working through?

[LisaKinVA]

 

If someone *isn't* doing debate, do you think there's a list of topics or resources they ought to be working through?

 

 

On a personal basis...I would definitely say abortion and origins (creation/evolution and the variations of that debate), as well as homosexuality. These are three very hot-button issues that IMO, require understanding in how we deal with people. We are going to meet people, work with people, etc. who are going to believe differently than we do (even within the church), and tend to make assumptions, often causing much hurt within the body of Christ.

 

Beyond those, I would also like to see kids have a good understanding about the role of government/taxes; welfare; elderly care; orphans/widows...

 

I have a lot of kids who start spouting off about how we shouldn't have to pay taxes, and think everything should be privatized, without thinking through the implications of that philosophy. Or, they take bold stances about eliminating food stamps or welfare, but again aren't thinking through the real effects (well, that's their problem attitudes). While I may agree with some of these positions, to one extent or another, the problem becomes ours. For example, what am I willing to do to try to make sure that these types of programs aren't needed in my area...what can I (or we) do about these problems here that will make a difference?

 

You can take any political issue and generate discussion.

 

If you don't want it to get boring, you could place a variety of topics from the news into a jar and just pick one a week to explore and discuss...get them involved in some brief research (both sides...they can include one opinion piece from each side, and perhaps one academic article supporting each side)...and then select a side to defend, and explain why this position is to be preferred, accounting for the opposition arguments in a respectful and tactful manner. Then extend that into one's daily life in a conversational way...how should we treat someone who believes X or Y, or has done X or Y...to hopefully personalize the experience.

 

But the big three in my house are abortion, creation/evolution, and homosexuality.

[Candid]

(and I still can't believe it's standard to spend the first 2-3 minutes of a 7 minute 1AC reading definitions...and yes, I do believe definitions are important, just not as important)

 

I'm pretty sure my son lost a round over the definition of the word significant. So I know what you mean about definitions. I've encourage him for next year to have cards on each word that isn't an article of the resolution and his case. I don't think he needs to read them in his cases, but he needs to be prepared for negative to try to narrowly define one of them.

[Candid]

 

But the big three in my house are abortion, creation/evolution, and homosexuality.

 

So would you suggest a team policy approach or Lincoln/Douglas Values debate? Because at least on one of these where I've actually worked in the field I can see either and I can see that either type of debate would generate hugely different approaches.

[LisaKinVA]

So would you suggest a team policy approach or Lincoln/Douglas Values debate? Because at least on one of these where I've actually worked in the field I can see either and I can see that either type of debate would generate hugely different approaches.

 

 

I have a bias toward policy (I love policy debate...when done well), but that doesn't mean LD is bad, it's just a personal preference. However, in these exercises, I don't think you can or should ignore the philosophical aspects of arguments...but you simply might need to frame the topic for discussion/research differently. (I really appreciated Dr. Keller's approach to science, when including the KOGS, because it gave you an opportunity to explore the philosophy behind different approaches to science, which I feel is too-often ignored). Philosophy on its own can be quite heady...lol...but can provide a good understanding to the "why" behind positions (in fact, WRT legal issues, most of the arguments are based in philosophical questions). Perhaps you use both.

 

For example, two philosophies that many people use without really thinking about them in framing arguments and making policy decisions are: man is basically good vs. man is basically evil. You can see these positions within the church, as well as in the real-world implications regarding the role of government. The first essentially believes that, generally, man can be counted on to do what is morally right (unless something goes wrong w/ nature/nurture) the second, is that man will act in his own selfish interests absent some restraining force (internal force, such as faith, or external force, such as government).

 

You could frame some philosophical questions and ask for the student to look for real-world/policy-type arguments that are drawn from these philosophies. This would require them to have a basic understanding of both competing philosophical positions, and then the argue why they believe this legal/political/social argument stems from that position (or worldview).

 

Just throwing out some ideas.

[LisaKinVA]

I'm pretty sure my son lost a round over the definition of the word significant. So I know what you mean about definitions. I've encourage him for next year to have cards on each word that isn't an article of the resolution and his case. I don't think he needs to read them in his cases, but he needs to be prepared for negative to try to narrowly define one of them.

 

When teaching debate, I stress the importance for everyone to write up why they are topical, and to have their definitions, standards, and interpretation. ready. It's part of developing the 1AC. No one should be scrambling to answer topicality as an affirmative (yes, there can be some squirrelly arguments, but in general, if the affirmative can explain why their plan is topical in a coherent manner, while explaining why the negative is being unreasonable, they should win this issue. My dinosaur-like approach to stock issues is that Topicality is the *only* stock issue in which the Affirmative has presumption (IOW, the negative *must* prove the affirmative is *not* topical), On every other stock issue, however, the negative has presumption. (Dinosaur is a term we use to lovingly refer to the coaches from an earlier debate era...apparently, I now qualify ;) )

 

Affirmative does not give up this presumption because they don't present their definitions in the 1AC (that is a common miss-perception within certain parts of NCFCA). I has been a standard part of debate elsewhere for 30 years or more that the affirmative may reserve the right to define terms, if challenged (thus allowing more of the 1AC to be spent developing Harms and Solvency in particular...the idea being the affirmative shouldn't have to waste time developing arguments that don't really win them the round, thereby shortchanging other core issues...and giving the negative more time to develop the attacks in which they already have presumption).

[Candid]

Lisa you just underline why I am so glad he's going to be in a different debate club next year. This year he was in a very small but local club run by another student. This guy had him running circles in the weeks before the tournament on an argument I knew would not come up, only to not have the basics covered. Grrrr. Next year we'll drive a bit further to be in a club run by an adult who knows what they are doing and can teach it.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

 

When teaching debate, I stress the importance for everyone to write up why they are topical, and to have their definitions, standards, and interpretation. ready. It's part of developing the 1AC. No one should be scrambling to answer topicality as an affirmative (yes, there can be some squirrelly arguments, but in general, if the affirmative can explain why their plan is topical in a coherent manner, while explaining why the negative is being unreasonable, they should win this issue. My dinosaur-like approach to stock issues is that Topicality is the *only* stock issue in which the Affirmative has presumption (IOW, the negative *must* prove the affirmative is *not* topical), On every other stock issue, however, the negative has presumption. (Dinosaur is a term we use to lovingly refer to the coaches from an earlier debate era...apparently, I now qualify ;) )

 

Affirmative does not give up this presumption because they don't present their definitions in the 1AC (that is a common miss-perception within certain parts of NCFCA). I has been a standard part of debate elsewhere for 30 years or more that the affirmative may reserve the right to define terms, if challenged (thus allowing more of the 1AC to be spent developing Harms and Solvency in particular...the idea being the affirmative shouldn't have to waste time developing arguments that don't really win them the round, thereby shortchanging other core issues...and giving the negative more time to develop the attacks in which they already have presumption).

 

I don't suppose there's any chance that debate can be taught in a virtual classroom setting, or that you would be willing to teach it that way?? Or have you a directory of other dinosaur debate coaches so I can search for one in my state?