Re: oceans

[Glen1@aol.com]

I agree with others that the oceans topic is potentially an excellent topic
area.  I also agree with Hansen, Joe Boyle, Matt Roskoski and others that the
topic should be phrased with enough latitude for debating.  I also agree that
an agent of action should be identified and that affirmative and negative
ground should be identified in the wording.  The resolution which would do
this  (among several others) would be one which identified the affirmative
ground as ocean development/exploration and the negative ground as outer
space exploration/development.  Such a topic would allow the affirmative an
opportunity to argue cases with impacts and the negative to counter with the
impacts associated with outer space.  In the real world this is a priority
consideration for policymakers. I especially like the inclusion of the outer
space issue because this area has received much support in the past national
surveys.

Glen Strickland
Emporia State Debate

---

• Prev by Date: oceans
• Next by Date: Re: Topic topic, where for art thou topic?
• Prev by thread: oceans
• Next by thread: Why bother with critiques?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page