I actually need to debate :(

Pages: 1

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
I actually need to debate :(

2007-04-03 14:30:37

Lucien: Fantasma Parastasie; +1,451|7100

2 on 2 debate
topic: religious schools should be banned/outlawed/forbidden/what have you not (hence the previous topic)
I am in favor, regardless of my opinion.

as you may have guessed, 'tis one of those school things, but unfortunately it weighs heavily for my grade, so I have to do it well.

What I need is some good advice. examples of SIMPLE, TO THE POINT arguements both for and against (for example: legal issues), how to tackle them, advice on how to debate, and what to expect

so lets see what you guys can come up with simply state your own opinion on the topic, if you want.

2007-04-03 14:35:28

topal63: . . .; +533|7166

First you need to present your agrument in detail... what facts, reasons, historical happenings, etc... support your premise.... construct your argument and draw your conclusion(s).

Then I will deconstruct your argument and point out why you are absurd and entirely wrong.

Seriously, you must have a premise - at least one reason? Like a reason why they should be banned; because were not talking about a public school ban - we are talking about a private sector ban. That is like trying to ban me from reading the Bible...

Or the opposite; you have a reason; a premise; why they shouldn't be banned. It's unconstitutional (in the US).

Last edited by topal63 (2007-04-03 14:45:24)

2007-04-03 14:40:41

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,993|7079|949

So basically you are asking us to think for you and do your assignment?

No dice brother.

2007-04-03 14:44:00

Lucien: Fantasma Parastasie; +1,451|7100

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
So basically you are asking us to think for you and do your assignment?

No dice brother.

I wrote:
argumenten tegen

-vrijheid in nederland

1. Ieder heeft het recht zijn godsdienst of levensovertuiging,
individueel of in gemeenschap met anderen, vrij te belijden,
behoudens ieders verantwoordelijkheid volgens de wet.

--N.V.T: studenten kunnen op ieder soort school hun religie uitoefenen.
--ze kunnen vragen aan schoolleiding als ze tijdens school bijvoorbeeld kunnen bidden. wellicht kan de wet hiervoor worden aangepast
----leerlingen kunnen in andere scholen hun religie uitoefenen. rel. scholen zijn niet NODIG om ze te kunnen uitoefenen

-vrijheid

'onderwijs is vrij'

en dat is nou de wet die we willen veranderen. je kan niet zeggen dat iets niet veranderd kan worden omdat er al een wet is dat het verbiedt.
moest verkrachting binnen het huwelijk nog legaal zijn, omdat het eerst zo was? In Nederland heeft men niet alleen vrijheid in het onderwijs, maar
ook vrijheid om de bestaande wetgeving aan te passen aan de situatie in de maatschappij.

educatieve perspectief: ze moeten hun religie leren, geschiedenis, taal, etc.

--het kan alweer op traditionele scholen: als leerlingen religieus verplicht zijn bepaalde dingen te leren kan een school hiermee rekening houden en speciale klassen hebben voor die mensen.

hoe moeten ze het dan leren?????vraagteken

--zie boven

mensen kunnen uit religieuze grond niet altijd zo vrij met anderen omgaan?

-welke?

(als ze daarop voldoende antwoord weten te geven)

aparte klassen op scholen. leerlingen van verschillende religies moeten met elkaar om moeten gaan. Het is vreemd dat we een land willen zijn waar racisme
geen rol speelt, maar wel een van de oorzaken ervan zijn gang willen laten gaan: door leerlingen met duidelijke verschillen apart te houden, ontstaat discriminatie tegen 'anderen' veel sneller.
in bijna elke religie wordt duidelijk aangegeven dat mensen van andere religies zondenaars zijn. als dit leerlingen heel hun leven wordt aangedrongen, hoe gaan ze zich dan wel niet gedragen
tegen anderen?

er is niks mis met het leren van je religie. Dit moet echter wel zo gebeuren dat je een objectieve standpunt kunt nemen, zodat je tot een duidelijke beslissing kan komen wat je wel en niet gelooft.
Als iedereen om je heen aandringt om precies te geloven wat zij vertellen kunnen leerlingen geindoctrineerd worden. Objectief is een school die religieuze keuzevakken heeft voor wie die wil volgen.
Niet objectief is een confessionele school waar je alleen maar jaren kan doen alsof je iets gelooft, totdat je er vanaf bent.

k?

Don't twist my words - all I want is some advice: what kind of arguments you can come up with that I might have missed, and what pitfalls to avoid

2007-04-03 14:44:33

Ridir: Semper Fi!; +48|7211

to win a debate you have to present your side with proof, facts, dates, etc. Then think about their side and how they will argue against what you just said and then think of how to defeat what they will more then likely say. Include that in your debate and you have a really good chance of winning unless you are up against overachievers or naturally good debaters

2007-04-03 14:46:39

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,993|7079|949

SargeV1.4 wrote:
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
So basically you are asking us to think for you and do your assignment?

No dice brother.
I wrote:
argumenten tegen

-vrijheid in nederland

1. Ieder heeft het recht zijn godsdienst of levensovertuiging,
individueel of in gemeenschap met anderen, vrij te belijden,
behoudens ieders verantwoordelijkheid volgens de wet.

--N.V.T: studenten kunnen op ieder soort school hun religie uitoefenen.
--ze kunnen vragen aan schoolleiding als ze tijdens school bijvoorbeeld kunnen bidden. wellicht kan de wet hiervoor worden aangepast
----leerlingen kunnen in andere scholen hun religie uitoefenen. rel. scholen zijn niet NODIG om ze te kunnen uitoefenen

-vrijheid

'onderwijs is vrij'

en dat is nou de wet die we willen veranderen. je kan niet zeggen dat iets niet veranderd kan worden omdat er al een wet is dat het verbiedt.
moest verkrachting binnen het huwelijk nog legaal zijn, omdat het eerst zo was? In Nederland heeft men niet alleen vrijheid in het onderwijs, maar
ook vrijheid om de bestaande wetgeving aan te passen aan de situatie in de maatschappij.

educatieve perspectief: ze moeten hun religie leren, geschiedenis, taal, etc.

--het kan alweer op traditionele scholen: als leerlingen religieus verplicht zijn bepaalde dingen te leren kan een school hiermee rekening houden en speciale klassen hebben voor die mensen.

hoe moeten ze het dan leren?????vraagteken

--zie boven

mensen kunnen uit religieuze grond niet altijd zo vrij met anderen omgaan?

-welke?

(als ze daarop voldoende antwoord weten te geven)

aparte klassen op scholen. leerlingen van verschillende religies moeten met elkaar om moeten gaan. Het is vreemd dat we een land willen zijn waar racisme
geen rol speelt, maar wel een van de oorzaken ervan zijn gang willen laten gaan: door leerlingen met duidelijke verschillen apart te houden, ontstaat discriminatie tegen 'anderen' veel sneller.
in bijna elke religie wordt duidelijk aangegeven dat mensen van andere religies zondenaars zijn. als dit leerlingen heel hun leven wordt aangedrongen, hoe gaan ze zich dan wel niet gedragen
tegen anderen?

er is niks mis met het leren van je religie. Dit moet echter wel zo gebeuren dat je een objectieve standpunt kunt nemen, zodat je tot een duidelijke beslissing kan komen wat je wel en niet gelooft.
Als iedereen om je heen aandringt om precies te geloven wat zij vertellen kunnen leerlingen geindoctrineerd worden. Objectief is een school die religieuze keuzevakken heeft voor wie die wil volgen.
Niet objectief is een confessionele school waar je alleen maar jaren kan doen alsof je iets gelooft, totdat je er vanaf bent.
k?

Don't twist my words - all I want is some advice: what kind of arguments you can come up with that I might have missed, and what pitfalls to avoid

I could probably help you, but I read teh engrish and spanish only.

2007-04-03 14:49:54

Lucien: Fantasma Parastasie; +1,451|7100

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I could probably help you, but I read teh engrish and spanish only.

if that

2007-04-03 15:01:54

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,993|7079|949

SargeV1.4 wrote:
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I could probably help you, but I read teh engrish and spanish only.
if that

so basically you are saying that you aren't going to translate it? So you are only asking the Dutch speaking members for input?

It's kind of hard for me to address facts/arguments that you may have missed if I can't understand what you wrote.

Ball is in your court Junior.

2007-04-03 15:19:32

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7154|67.222.138.85

Seriously. Translate that text and I'm sure there would be a LOT more people willing to help.

2007-04-03 15:53:17

usmarine2007: Banned; +374|6814|Columbus, Ohio

Or we could just ban threads about religion.

2007-04-03 19:15:54

Skorpy-chan: Member; +127|6792|Twyford, UK

But that'd cut half the point of this place out. This entire forum seems to be about discussing the kind of crap you're not meant to on a date.

2007-04-03 19:47:15

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,073|7219|PNW

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
So basically you are asking us to think for you and do your assignment?

No dice brother.

If you read a book that helps you with an assignment, then you're not thinking for yourself, even if you don't use the exact writing. He asked for advice, not what to say, exactly.

Sarge: honestly, think about how your instructor thinks. If emotional reasons are preferred, go with that. If he likes facts, go with that. I'm not speaking for all, but teachers are notoriously biased when it comes to gray-area subjects that aren't of a mathematical, yes/no or a similar nature. I got a C in a civics class (which I shouldn't have had to take) because I didn't agree with my teacher on certain political issues.

So if he's left, lean left. Right, lean right (unless you're like me and was forced by the high school to take this class I wasn't even told or forewarned about over summer for a diploma, and was just pissed off). It's the Clinton way.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-04-03 19:55:54)

2007-04-03 21:25:55

lowing: Banned; +1,662|7099|USA

How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!

2007-04-03 21:52:59

Ridir: Semper Fi!; +48|7211

lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!

very very good post. Our Constitution is Freedom of's not freedom from's. But I'll stop now before I start ranting.

2007-04-03 21:56:28

lowing: Banned; +1,662|7099|USA

Ridir wrote:
lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!
very very good post. Our Constitution is Freedom of's not freedom from's. But I'll stop now before I start ranting.

Yup, but, by all means RANT AWAY!!!

2007-04-03 21:57:34

Ridir: Semper Fi!; +48|7211

lowing wrote:
Ridir wrote:
lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!
very very good post. Our Constitution is Freedom of's not freedom from's. But I'll stop now before I start ranting.
Yup, but, by all means RANT AWAY!!!

I've got a paper to write and two midterms to study for, except I am so not doing any of it. I'm so fucked.

2007-04-04 00:34:14

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6821|Kyiv, Ukraine

http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

MEMORIZE THIS...it will make your arguements smarter here too on the boards, as well as letting you see right through Rovian talking points. Hopefully, when Rove is about to retire he writes his own manual for public consumption about his propoganda genius.

2007-04-04 01:30:10

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,073|7219|PNW

Ridir wrote:
lowing wrote:
Ridir wrote:
very very good post. Our Constitution is Freedom of's not freedom from's. But I'll stop now before I start ranting.
Yup, but, by all means RANT AWAY!!!
I've got a paper to write and two midterms to study for, except I am so not doing any of it. I'm so fucked.

Just do it. You'll feel better, and your game will be better too with that load off your mind.

GorillaTicTacs wrote:
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

MEMORIZE THIS...it will make your arguements smarter here too on the boards, as well as letting you see right through Rovian talking points. Hopefully, when Rove is about to retire he writes his own manual for public consumption about his propoganda genius.

Wikipedia also has good articles on the types listed.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-04-04 01:31:33)

2007-04-04 02:51:13

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7122|Canberra, AUS

lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!

Goddamn. I must be turning into what I thought I should be - a conservative.

I agree.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2007-04-04 03:01:32

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,073|7219|PNW

Spark wrote:
lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!
Goddamn. I must be turning into what I thought I should be - a conservative.

I agree.

Welcome to conservativism. Here's your SUV.

2007-04-04 03:04:20

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7122|Canberra, AUS

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Spark wrote:
lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!
Goddamn. I must be turning into what I thought I should be - a conservative.

I agree.
Welcome to conservativism. Here's your SUV.

As of now I'm calling myself left-leaning-centrist-libertarian.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2007-04-04 05:08:39

lowing: Banned; +1,662|7099|USA

Spark wrote:
lowing wrote:
How 'bout this:

Our Constitution gives us the right OF “Freedom of Religion" not, FROM “Freedom of Religion". If you do not want to attend such teachings then don't. If, however, you do want to attend these schools, take your pick and attend, with the sincerest blessings of our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Veterans.

Could someone pat me on the back???............I can't reach!
Goddamn. I must be turning into what I thought I should be - a conservative.

I agree.

I have my moments, don't I Spark?

Pages: 1

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
I actually need to debate :(

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums I actually need to debate :(

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I wrote:

SargeV1.4 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

SargeV1.4 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ridir wrote:

lowing wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ridir wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ridir wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ridir wrote:

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Board footer