High school Public Forum Debate should not confront Sensitive Religous Issues

Resolved: High School Public Forum Debate Resolutions should not confront sensitive Religious Issues Contention One: Biased Judges When judging a round of debate Tabula Rasa is suppose to be exercised. This request is nearly impossible when the resolution incurs sensitive religious issues. According to the NY TIMES "the only way to avoid bias is to avoid the situations that produce it." When the resolution consists of religion, people tend to have very opinionated views on the topic. This makes judging a debate round unfair in many ways. The whole concept in debate is to be able to persuade the judge to agree with your case. When the judge possesses a strong belief for or against the resolution this makes for the debate to be impossible. No matter what the Affirmative or Negative states the judge will not be able to exercise Tabula Rasa due to the strong belief for or against the religion. Contention Two: Abuse of Religion In a Public forum debate the format consists of thirty minutes to discuss the resolution. When the resolution consists of sensitive religious issues this could be a problem. Followers spend their whole life trying to learn the religion and interpret the religion for them self. This could lead to a false interpretation of the religion causing hostility in the room. The false interpretation does not provide the correct guidance or education for any religion. The whole point of a debate is not only to learn how to persuade your judge but is also learning from the material. With the false interpretation and the hostility could cause a number of unsafe situations to exist. Everyone has different views on religion and by using it in a debate could downplay another's religion or the way they were brought up. This could also lead to belittling the opponent and making them feel "lesser" of a person due to the way they were raised. The point of debating isn't to belittle your opponent or even mentally abuse them. It is to persuade your judge with your case to vote for you resulting in a winner. By providing a winner there has to be a loser. This also belittles the opponent by saying their religion isn't good enough. They "LOST" because their religion isn't good enough. Switch side debate is also a key factor when having resolutions with sensitive religious issues. The ability to argue against your religion wouldn't provide the equality throughout the debate. Contention Three: Separation of Church and State Throughout America the education system prohibits the preference of one religion over another. This is in place to provide a learning environment that doesn't offer government intrusion on others beliefs. When allowing Public forum Debate to harness resolutions that involve religious issues this contradicts the amendment of Separation of Church and State. The school we learn in is an establishment backed and funded by the government. By allowing religion to take part in government funded events this would completely contradict the amendment. The whole concept of Separation of Church and State is to assure no religion is more dominant over another. Thanks