The dictionary is quite clear. A \u201cdebatable\u201d issue is one that is \u201ccapable of being argued or discussed.\u201d To debate an issue is to \u201cdeliberate or consider; to engage in argument; to discuss opposing points.\u201d<\/p>\n
Most of us can understand this. Most of us engage regularly in discussions about issues affecting our lives. The resolution to these discussions is usually a proposal that allows support with which all can agree and a plan for acceptance of differences.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, an obsolete definition of the term \u201cdebate\u201d is to fight or quarrel, to dispute or argue about, to fight or argue for or over. The obsolete term reflects conflict, strife, contention. The goal from the Latin and French derivatives is to beat, fight against each other\u2026<\/p>\n
It appears that the organizers of the so called debates we must witness today (if we wish to hear discussion and support or lack of support regarding issues affecting our lives) are using the obsolete definition of debate! The goal appears to be the fight \u2014 not the discussion or search for responsible plans.<\/p>\n
As a long time ago debate team member and as a former mentor for high school debate teams, I never limited presentations or responses to \u201c30 seconds to two minutes\u201d! The students would never have tolerated such nonsense! Nor should we tolerate such behavior today. We must recognize the lack of value, the encouragement of distrust, the tolerance of academic insults, and the avoidance of any value to the debates at they continue to be called.<\/p>\n
Our candidates for president of the United States deserve better than that. Each candidate is qualified, experienced, intelligent, determined and caring. We must find a way to allow those individuals to \u201cdeliberate or consider\u201d and to engage in true \u201cdiscussion or argument\u201d without having to resort to attack and insult or fight or conflict in order to command TV time.<\/p>\n
Dorothea Farris<\/p>\n
Crystal River Valley<\/p>\n