High School Students Disqualified From Debate After Quoting Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson

Nov 2005
7,437
2,068
California
#23
There is nothing that liberalism will not destroy. Liberalism has now destroyed formal debate.
This type of response is the foolishness I was referencing earlier.
One judge for one round decided something which two tournament directors acknowledged was a “legitimate gripe”.
That's it.

If anything, "formal debate" gets "destroyed" by people who copy/paste their statements without the ability to actual converse about the topic. It gets "destroyed" by people who devolve thread after thread into non-topical constitutional history discussions. :rolleyes:
 
Likes: Lyzza
Jun 2012
41,942
15,150
Barsoom
#24
This type of response is the foolishness I was referencing earlier.
One judge for one round decided something which two tournament directors acknowledged was a “legitimate gripe”.
That's it.

If anything, "formal debate" gets "destroyed" by people who copy/paste their statements without the ability to actual converse about the topic. It gets "destroyed" by people who devolve thread after thread into non-topical constitutional history discussions. :rolleyes:
Liberalism has now destroyed formal debate.
 
Dec 2013
31,537
18,840
Beware of watermelons
#25
I believe I read that the judge stated before the debate that the debaters should not to be racist.
Given that, if the affirmative team heard this before they started and they had this squirrel prepared as a possibility, they could have chosen to use the squirrel then (instead of another, not squirrely plan).
Just a thought...

Another thought...
I saw one of the videos including one of the guys "speed reading" his argument. I had to stop that video at that time cause it was annoying as hell. While the text of his statement was printed on the screen, if you didn't have the text of his argument before you, I think many would not be able to follow his comments.
The debater stated that there were various people who used such tactics and that the text of the statements were provided to others. When I was in debate, we didn't hand such information over to the opposing team nor to the judge. The judge and the opposing team needed to take notes as to the arguments presented, while at the same time preparing their own counter to those arguments.



I typed out the below and then I realized my response was probably not addressing what your question was truly really aimed at...
If any affirmative plan involved "liquidating undesirable populations", most likely the school and/or debate coach would justifiably squash that plan and the students would be instructed to come up with another one. This would not be illegal because, as you observed, "their freedoms are limited to start with".
Moreover, "freedom of speech" typically guarantees people a capability to state something. It does not guarantee that the speaker can choose whatever venue he pleases (when the venue is run by somebody else) and demand to use that venue for his speech.


A lot of the basics of the debate structure seemed similar to what I experienced in high school.
There is a resolution that is adopted for the region. Here, it was: “Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially reduce restrictions on legal immigration.”
The affirmative team prepares an approach which justifies the resolution (stating why it's necessary), prepares a plan which meets the resolution and addresses the provided reasons as to why it's necessary.
The negative team counters with various tactics like trying to show why it's not truly necessary, showing why the plan has disadvantages, showing why the affirmative team's approach does not satisfy the resolution, showing why the affirmative team's plan does not actually address the reasons why they claim it's necessary, etc. Any combination of arguments that fall into "stock issue" categories.
What you describe would easily fit into one of those categories where the negative team would simply point to existing law which opposed "liquidating undesirable populations" and documenting why circumventing this law (against murder / genocide) was a bad thing (which shouldn't be too hard).

In most school driven debates (at least in the area I am from), team members have to be able to argue both sides of the issue. They have to both prepare an "affirmative plan" and defend it when they are arguing as the "affirmative team", and they also have to prepare a wide variety of counter arguments which could be applied to any "affirmative plan" they encounter when they are chosen for the "negative team".

They do the speed reading because for evidence to be presented the whole thing has to be read and it is a timed event. It is a common practice. If you recall there were highlighted parts. That was most likely the parts they intend on using.
 
Likes: Jimmyb
Dec 2013
31,537
18,840
Beware of watermelons
#26
LOL...another "fake news" article by Sabcat, using as proof a fake news site (Dailywire).



Virtually every story favors the right and denigrates the left. The Daily Wire has also published some false information such as these and this directly from Ben Shapiro. Further, a factual search reveals that the Daily Wire, on a whole, has a mixed track record with fact checkers.

Look. Another bolded, oversized newspeak post.

War is peace, right comrade?
 
Sep 2015
13,444
4,928
Brown Township, Ohio
#29
Really, or you just want cheap rhetorical points for you favorite youtubers!

You start a thread on some idiot broadcasting from his laptop, declaring that barring the comedy team of Shapiro and Peterson from speaking to high schoolers is an attack on freedom of speech, but you (and nobody else for that matter) wants to talk about why a Christian university is also disinviting them from appearing on their campus!
Sabcat lives in a log cabin on the Prairie and near Colorado. Sabcat showed me a picture of his muscle car, 1969 Hemi Dodge Daytona if not mistaken
 
Dec 2016
4,388
2,274
Canada
#30
Sabcat lives in a log cabin on the Prairie and near Colorado. Sabcat showed me a picture of his muscle car, 1969 Hemi Dodge Daytona if not mistaken
I wish I was living in the country also...and likely will again as soon as I'm retired....don't see how that connects with the debate topic though!