Resolved: In a
democracy, the public’s right to know ought to be valued above the right to
privacy of candidates for public office.
I haven’t liked this since I first heard it when it was
proposed. I was obviously in the minority.
While I grant there are some things about a candidate we
have a right to know, this resolution presumes we have a right to know
everything. There are no qualifiers in the rez, not a one, end of story. We
have a right to know (or not) everything, including, say, if a candidate has
had an abortion, or uses birth control devices, the sort of things that are
simply nobody’s business but one’s own, and while they may have bearing on
prejudices about a candidate, a bad thing, they might play no role in the office that candidate
aspires to. Matters of public record, opinions on issues, that sort of thing?
Yes. If you sit in your room and drink yourself into a stupor, it would be nice
to know that before I vote for you, but I don’t have to right to know that. If
you leave the house stone drunk in public, I do have a right to know that. Do I
want to argue the difference? No way. Nor would I want to listen to the
arguments. With today’s politics, which cannot be ignored even in values debate
(or is it, cannot be ignored especially
in values debate?), these rounds will be a mess.
Resolved: The
United States federal government should impose price controls on the
pharmaceutical industry.
A thorny issue all around, and a real one, and an important
one. I don’t know how you throw evidence at this, once you get past R&D
costs vs impoverished patients (dull), but at the societal level, I’m
fascinated by it. I don’t know if it will debate well, but it’s a valiant stab
at the topic, especially in our capitalist, anti-socialized medicine culture.
NOTE: In the real world, the only people against subsidized health care are the
ones who don’t need the subsidies.
No comments:
Post a Comment