Hey everybody,
Sorry about the delay for this month’s debate – I flew down to South Africa to watch one of the World Cup games. the South African government spent a lot of money getting the cities ready to host the games. Singapore also recently announced that they will be spending 3 times more than they budgeted for the Youth Olympic Games (but they didn’t specify whether this burden would be borne by the taxpayers or the corporate sponsors). Our Formula 1 night race is also just around the corner again – and that’s another huge expense. Since it’s the season for international sporting events, I thought this would be a good time to bring up a classic debate training motion.
Well debaters, what do you think? Should South Africa have used their money to combat poverty instead? Should Singapore have used the money to build better drains (so Orchard doesn’t get flooded)? Or will hosting these games bring direct and indirect benefits to the country that make the benefits far outweigh the costs?
MOE announced last month that sex and sexuality education is returning to schools – but the provision of this education is limited to 6 chosen external providers (Fei Yue Community Services, Cornerstone Community Services Centre, High Achievers Training Consultancy, Focus on the Family Singapore, Eka Training Group and Touch Youth). Schools are traditionally seen as responsible for holistic education of a young person – including moral values and sex education. However, this view has drawn criticism from people who have their own differing views on sexuality education. The heated debate on sex education was covered extensively in the local media over the last few months, and resulted in the “AWARE saga“.
Fellow debaters, sex and sexuality education is a very sensitive issue for Singaporeans, but it must be debated in order to see both sides of the coin. What is the best way to educate our youth (ie, yourselves!) on sex education – is it through the status quo (where schools use the above 6 external providers) or through parents (who bear ultimate responsibility for the development of their child, but may not always know how to provide sex education)? Let’s hear your views!
Televised political debates between contesting candidates were first introduced in USA in 1960 with the (in)famous Nixon-Kennedy debates. Today, the candidate debates in America are a critical part of the election process – a passage of fire that has been lauded and criticised by various parties. UK recently introduced a televised debate… but with somewhat confusing results – political analysts are still grappling with the impact of the debates on the fate of the various parties in the upcoming UK election.
Should political candidates be required to debate before the election? Is debate the right tool to determine the leadership for a country? Are voters educated correctly after watching a debate, and are they able to make the “right” choice from the debate? Does the country as a whole benefit from the process of having a political debate on TV?
Debaters, this is a difficult topic to grapple with – so I ask that you show us how you can handle a complex topic with logic, analysis, substantiation, and (most importantly) tact. This is not about the political parties involved – this is a question of whether or not the tool of TV debates is harmful or not. So, my fellow debaters, let’s debate.
Tiger Woods, John Terry, Jesse James, Bill Clinton, Meg Ryan and even our local Jack Neo – all of them cheated on their spouses. The selfish actions of these individuals caused emotional harm and suffering to their partners and their families. Most members of society (even the more socially liberal ones) condemn the act of infidelity and adultery as an “immoral act”. Singapore has laws that prevent people from harming each other, and also prevent people from participating in “immoral” activities even if they want to – forms of unlicensed gambling, homosexuality, incest, possession of pornography, and other activities are banned by the state even if the acts are conducted between consenting adults. So Singapore is willing to criminalise immoral acts – yet adultery is not illegal in Singapore today. Hmm.
On the other hand, there are many who believe that the state should not dictate how a married couple should lead their lives – even in the event of infidelity, it should be up to the couple to determine whether they want to forgive and move on, or divorce. If adultery was made a criminal offense, the state could intervene and prosecute the cheating partner, thus disallowing the couple from resolving the situation on their own sometimes. Criminal laws should not be introduced lightly. As one website put it, “Yes, infidelity is awful. But it’s none of the government’s business.” South Korea, New Hampshire, and many other places that currently criminalise adultery are now considering revoking the “archaic” law.
This is clearly a controversial and timely issue for us to debate – experts are divided, and the implications for both sides of the case are quite severe. What should Singapore do? Fellow debaters, let’s hear your thoughts!
[Best comment stands to win an exclusive DA(S) 5 VCD set with accompanying guide booklets]
Dear Debaters,
Is content more important than style? Should you listen to the tips that adjudicators give you after a debate, or should you only listen to your coach? What is barracking? How do you handle biased motions? What about definitional challenges – how do you win a debate even when the other team refuses to accept your definitions?
If you have ever wondered about these questions, or had something else that you really wanted to clarify, this is the page to do it. Ask our experts and senior debaters for their thoughts on difficult issues! There is no such thing as a dumb question (we were all once young and clueless debaters too!) so please use this post to chatter away!
Senior debaters, please feel free to share your opinions and answers here – the only way young debaters will improve is if they can learn from the experienced ones like yourselves!
These are the slides and other materials used at the Teacher Training Workshop held on 6 Feb 2010 in conjunction with Wits & Words 2010. This material is designed for primary school teachers who wish to understand the GEB-HCI-DA(S) Inter-Primary School Debates “Wits & Words” and who wish to learn the basics of coaching a team and adjudicating a debate.
Wits & Words 2010: Teachers’ Resource Sheet
Wits & Words 2010: Slides Used For Adjudicator Training for Teachers
Wits & Words 2010: Slides Used for Coaches’ Workshop
If you have further queries on any aspect of Wits & Words 2010, feel free to get in touch with us!
Loading ...
