[eDebate] ???Overturning Roe v Wade????
Mon Apr 10 13:12:12 CDT 2006
the only argument why the scenario played out in point #1 is any different
than an anarchist judge who "has to" vote for a plan that advocates gov't
action is founded on an implict hierarchy in which one person's values are
assumed to be more important and 'more deeply believed' than another's. the
anti-abortion judge (yes, they exist) would have to "deny" their own beliefs
to vote AFF on the kind of "progressive" privacy topic advocated by some in
as for point #2, am i crazy for thinking that an 18-year old who has had an
abortion whose FIRST or PRIMARY or MOST TRAUMATIC experience with the
arguments of anti-abortion come from a debate round rather than a) their own
research into the matter, b) protesters outside the clinic, c) the news, d)
friends or relatives who disagree with their decision has mal-devlopment
issues that run waaay deeper than getting their life values challenged in a
>===== Original Message From "NEIL BERCH" <berchnorto at msn.com> =====
>I understand that there are plenty of ways to overturn Roe v. Wade that
>expand reproductive rights. Here, however, are two concrete concerns:
>1. A gay or lesbian judge who "has to" vote to overturn Lawrence v. Texas
>and limit her/his own privacy and sexuality rights because that's the
>argument that wins on the flow.
>2. An 18 year-old debater on the negative who has just had an abortion and
>has to listen to a narrative-based 1AC that overturns Roe from the right.
>I'm not sure this is good for that student's development.
>I think these things will happen. Other things will probably happen that
>are good. I think everyone needs to think about these arguments, but I also
>think we shouldn't just dismiss the claims out of hand.
>West Virginia University
>>From: nrichter at umsis.miami.edu
>>To: "Steven D'Amico" <stevendamico at gmail.com>
>>CC: edebate at ndtceda.com
>>Subject: Re: [eDebate] ???Overturning Roe v Wade????
>>Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:59:14 -0400 (EDT)
>>I am sure Nicole Colston will respond to this, but I feel the need to do so
>>Quoting Steven D'Amico <stevendamico at gmail.com>:
>> > I'm really confused by this post. I see to two different points. The
>> > topic
>> > process is not open (fair opinion, while I disagree with it) and
>> > debating
>> > roe v wade is bad for women in debate.
>>What do you think is good about the topic selection process? Do you not
>>the lack of womyn on the committee is a problem?
>> > My opinion is that it's about time the community debates roe. Not
>> > because
>> > it's a womyns issue (which it obviously is) but because it's a timely
>> > issue
>> > which is about to be adressed by our government. Remember all those SC
>> > nominations?
>>You conceed that this is a womyn's issue (which seems like perhaps womyn
>>be consulted about this issue), but that is not as important as the fact
>>it is a current event. There are tons of other current events we could be
>>debating (refer to the list Nicole made in her original post like
>>why are we choosing to focus on this particular issue?
>> > Nicole, I'm not trying to be a patriarchal asshole (I've been accused of
>> > it
>> > before, I like to point out I'm just an asshole to everyone, not just
>> > womyn)
>> > But I just do not understand this statement:
>> > "I will WITHDRAW my squad's participation in NDT/CEDA debate without
>> > hesitation next year if Roe vs. Wade is included on the ballot. I am
>> > sick
>> > over the extent in which this "activity" has no respect for women and
>> > fear
>> > the effects on female participation if Roe v Wade is included."
>> > I do not understand how including Roe means the community has no respect
>> > for
>> > Women. Please explain it to me. If the lack of this fact seeming obvious
>> > to
>> > me is an indication of me being a patriarch or whatever, tell me why so
>> > I
>> > can understand.
>>Explain to me how debating this issue will increase female participation in
>>activity? There is only a risk that some womyn will feel personally
>>emotionally or intellectually from this debate, thus decreasing female
>>participation. Because this is a womyn's issue, as you yourself have
>>of course it will effect womyn in this community and the fact that womyn
>>not consulted seems to prove the lack of respect. Moreover, the way it
>>was "mentioned" in the e-debate posts with ZERO discussion on how this
>>effect womyn in the community is major oversight.
>>University of Miami
>>eDebate mailing list
>>eDebate at ndtceda.com
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at ndtceda.com
More information about the Mailman