Resolved: High School Public Forum Debate Resolutions should not confront sensitive religious issues

I am surprised to see that the solution the Affirmation has to this issue is to choose topics that are not at the center of media attention. Public Forum is based solely on making topics that are current and popular. That is why Public Forum was created. And forming from the name Controversy Debate, the Aff wants to take the controversy out. If it is not talked by the media, there is little controversy. Also, if it is away from the media's sight, how will one research it? There will be outdated, if not no, evidence on the Internet to support their cases. If an issue is not in the eyes of the media, why would they choose it? Just to get some controversy out? Would we be arguing about Hitler's treatment of the Jews? "An example would be that, "Islamic terrorists caused the Ground Zero incident. " Or "The introduction of a Mosque would upset the local residence. " Either of these contentions could involve points that would offend students. " -The students could obviously not include these contentions to include in these debates. Terrorists did cause 9/11. But how does this offend Muslims, as most of them are not terrorists. It would upset the local residence. Muslims need to accept the fact that many Americans do not like Muslims. If they cannot accept that fact in Public Forum, what will happen when they meet people in real life when they are discriminated against? If they feel offended by these contention, I will stress that they can simply not include them. My opponent has assumed that even if they feel offended by these contentions, they will blindly support them in their case. "My examples in the first contention are related to the debate room because debate is about logic and facts. Religion does not have facts; it has faith. " -I cannot stress this enough. We are talking about sensitive religious issues. My opponent has made no connection to religion and religious issues. ". .. it creates a confusing setting for judges who are trying to evaluate what point each side is making and how effectively that side represented that point. " -If points are being hypocritical, then the judge will of course take away points for arguments. Also, religion is not religious issue. There was no National Forensics League Topic that was about an Islamic Mosque last year. [1] Religion in itself is not hypocritical, but the majority of them are? Can you clarify? "Yes, not debating is a reasonable alternative. " I agree too. Now to answer my opponent's questions. 1. Yes. That is the core of Public Forum. And by the way, I did not agree that the topics insulted and angered many students. 2. No, because there is no opinion in debate. There is a certain amount of acting involved. We support an Aff and Neg case, so opinions and background should not influence these. Maybe I didn't understand the questions right ://3. No, because the people that choose not to go are minimal, if existent. 4. None. But you do not contradict yourself in a religious issue. 5. None. Religious issues have a large value in debate. 6. Yes, but not related to getting emotional. Wouldn't it be good for Muslims to argue against a fallacious argument that "Most Muslims are terrorists? " If religion is based on faith alone, why would someone base a contention off it? Also, can you please cite where the sources pertain to you case? Thank you. What the Affirmation is stating is that we should censor topics in Public Forum. Not just bad topics, but topics that contribute to the most talked about topic in news. I stated that people will not be offended. To the contrary, people will gain educational value, which will result in tolerance. This is a rebuttal, not a contention. Perhaps the most important thing of note is that the Affirmation's logic is flawed. Using his or her logic, we should take everything away from public forum. Of course people will be insulted on every topic. This would result in the destruction of public forum. My opponent's first source does not reflect how debaters react, just the population. Remember, these are teenage debaters, who are more tolerant to religion [2]. The second source is similar to the first one. The site even calls the Islamic cultural center a mosque. 1. . http://wiki.pfdebate.com... 2. . http://www.gallup.com... Thank you