[eDebate] 'Roe' and What I am NOT trying to do. . .
Thu Apr 13 02:47:27 CDT 2006
Nicole <nicole.colston at gmail.com> wrote: 8) I am NOT teaching my students what to think, I am teaching them how and how to act.
I don't know that teaching them how to act is much better. My mom taught me how to act at the dinner table, and that was less than liberating -- imagine very large volumes of Emily Post. The point is there's nothing wrong with teaching them that they should act or even demonstrating through your own actions, but what you are advocating is demarcating Roe as an unspeakable subject that is not appropriate for debate. What of the prolife students at your institution who may walk through your door, would you tell them that you are categorically set against their affirmative choices? Anyone who makes that judgement call may want those heads back when the department or student government or the college ask that critical question....and how many students does policy debate serve on our campus?
Veronica is awesome, she seems to always bring sensibility to the discussion. However, I see my protest of Roe v. Wade as teaching my students how to think, not what. This is resolutional analysis, consideration of ethic and structure, etc. And I am doing this now, when it counts, not later when it can't be changed.
I do appreciate that you are voicing your opinion and doing it during the crafting rather than after, because there always much hemming and hawing afterwards and it usually includes me doing some of that. My issue isn't with resolutional analysis, it is that the conclusion is so final, irrevocable and totalizing. This can not be talked about, in any way, ever, during the course of a debate, even if last year's topic introduced this same subject without disastrous consequences. Certainly discussing China's One Child Policy was less touchy than Harvard's affirmative about "transracial abductions," known to most as cross cultural adoptions.
I do not want my students to feel disenfranchised by this process--which is something they always complain about- - I want them to know we make decisions that are educational and personally empowering.
Veronica- won't the question posed always be how the state should control the female body? isn't the answer always how, not if?
First and foremost, the state controls THE body not just the female body. Suicide is illegal as is assisted suicide. The state regulates what substances I consume and sets parameters around that consumption. The question of state control over the body may be the most popular critical question of this debate era. Why doesn't this make Roe the most salient debate to have? Some of the leftist versions of overturn Roe v. Wade cite as their justification that the Roe doctrine could address the question of "if" the female body is subject to state control but instead only answers how it is subject to state control. But if Roe never makes it to a topic wording or concerns over Roe's inclusion sinks the Court topic area in the preliminary vote, then we can all sidestep that debate and talk about IPR some more.
Veronica M. Guevara
Weber State University
Dept. of Communications
1605 University Circle
Ogden, UT 84408
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman