Resolved: High school Public Forum Debate resolutions should not confront sensitive religious issues.
Foreword: The mid-term elections are expected to result in substantial gains for conservative candidates in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A new political party is emerging from its infancy and continues to inch its way into the mainstream political scene. The unemployment rate is 9.6 percent and the national debt is inching toward $14 trillion. Businesses are struggling to comply with new financial regulations and health care reform. Congress recessed before passing tax legislation for 2011, compounding the uncertainty felt by individuals and businesses in the current economic environment. Teenage bullying is leading to the loss of many young lives in schools across the country. Europe is on high alert as a potential target of anticipated terror attacks. And the NBA has announced that it is requiring its coaches to wear collared shirts. Because of the apparent lack of substantive issues to address, the NFL writing committee has you spending your month debating about debating.
I know many of you will not be using this topic; for those of you who are, my advice is to establish a framework to guide your thinking. My basic approach was to apply John Rawls’ philosophical work on political liberalism to the debate context, making this month’s file an interesting combination of LD and Policy argumentation. The strategy guide pulls on the ideas from the evidence without using the technical terminology (in an attempt to pretend like this is still Public Forum). The evidence packet is short because this month, your experiences have qualified you as an expert, and you’re probably your own best evidence. Good Luck.