Debate 101 - Motion 1 (On Liberties and Rights)

Rani Sati Temple is a famous temple located in Jhunjhunu town in the Indian state of Rajasthan. The rani sati temple is a very famous pilgrimage for the locals and rajasthanis all over the world. People from various states visit here every year to offer their pooja to Shri Rani Sati (the goddess). Rani Sati was married to an Agrawal young man Tandhan Das in antiquity, who died in warfare. His young wife became sati. The location of her sacrifice is now marked with the memorial temple in Hissar. Rani Sati ji was the first of thirteen Sati of her community to commit sati. (Wikipedia)


With the continuing prevalence of Sati, a practice that has always been, and continues to be, socially ostracized by the emerging rights-sensitized community, women rights activists as well as social engineers are constantly striving to delegitimise any symbol lending credibility or support to social practices that need to be shunned, especially one of Sati. Their justifications center around the possibility of demagogues borrowing legitimacy from existing symbols and structures to fuel and perpetuate reprehensible social practices; in their view to counter an 'ostensible' assault on indigenous tradition and forms of expression.

However, in the thick of this controversy remains an unresolved sphere of debate as to where lie the limits of the state in banning institutions that symbolize an at best forgettable social construct that was culturally embedded in the Hindu orthodox communities. Between the value of preserving the right of expression and thought as well as the liberty to worship; and the need to address realist concerns about communities deriving support from institutions that passively exist, lies an answer to the question of allowing institutions to remain that represent existing or historic social constructs.

Would you allow a temple to remain accessible to worshipers, knowing that the goddess became a goddess because she committed Sati? Would this temple indeed further encourage Sati? What is the value of the right to express or worship? What are the circumstances wherein the state can curb this right? Even if this does symbolize the practice, is there still a value to keeping this temple intact? 

"This house will lock up the Rani Sati Temple in Rajasthan"

• We invite arguments either in support of, or against this motion. Think laterally!
• Mail in your inputs to bsd.nlsiu@gmail.com. 
• We will put up the arguments in support of the motion after three days. After that, we will post the responses to those arguments. 
• In exactly a week from now, we will present our own views and point out errors in argumentation, and of course, commend interesting inputs.
• Do let everyone interested know of this! Mail your clarifications to us anytime.
• If you do send an entry, don't forget to mention your name, school and class!

We look forward to an engaging debate and an encouraging participation.

Cheers!

Debate 101 - It's time again to "Start Making Sense"

Hi everyone!

We have freshly updated our Debate 101 page. The significance of it is straightforward. The page explains our long term objective regarding NLS Debate - Junior. We mean every word of it, and this can only mean two things.

First, keep looking out for this page. There's more to come, and soon!

Second, NLS Debate - Junior is here to stay, and is definitely coming back to you! 

Cheers!

Motions used in recent tournaments

To give you a sense of the kind of motions used in tournaments at the college-level, we are posting the motions used in two tournaments held recently, i.e. the 5th NUJS Debate (January 20-22, 2012) and the 2nd Loyola College Debate (January 14-16, 2012). As you will notice, some motions are based on recent controversies that have received attention in the news-media whereas some others touch on issues that have been contentious on a more general level. Usually parliamentary-style debating tournaments will include a healthy mix of topics that test the participants' familiarity with the facts surrounding a public controversy as well as their ability to analyse the underlying issues. In order to present persuasive and coherent arguments, teams must value both skills, namely knowledge and analytical reasoning. We hope these topics will give you some food for thought in the coming months. We are of course eagerly looking forward to the second season of the 'NLS Debate Junior' which will be planned later this year. So keep following this blog for updates.

Motions from the 5^th NUJS Parliamentary Debate (Jan. 20-22, 2012)

Held at West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS), Kolkata [58 teams took part in 6 preliminary rounds and the top 16 teams proceeded to the knock-out phase of the tournament]

Motions used for demonstration debates

• This house believes that it was a bad idea to invite Salman Rushdie to the Jaipur Literature Festival

• This house will hold social networking websites liable for offensive content posted by their users

Round 1 : The dismal science - Economics (20/1/2012)

• This house is against private sector participation in the management of pension funds
• This house believes that the devaluation of national currencies is a justifiable tool to boost export earnings
• This house believes that central monetary institutions should be insulated from executive control

Round 2: The faith factor - Religion (20/1/2012)

• This house will no longer impose the requirement of celibacy for Catholic Priests
• This house believes that the state should offer financial assistance to interfaith couples
• This house believes that there is nothing wrong with conversion through inducement

Round 3: Sport (20/1/2012)

• This house believes that violent sports involving animals should be prohibited
• This house believes that players on national teams should not be contractually prevented from participating in profit-driven professional leagues
• This house will establish a special tax on high-earning sportspersons to fund the development of sports

Round 4: Beyond Boundaries - Foreign Affairs (21/1/2012)

• This house believes that the targeted killings of Iranian nuclear scientists is justified
• This house believes that national governments should not hire foreign lobbying firms to represent their interests
• This house believes that there is an obligation to repatriate deposed tyrants back to their home countries

Round 5: Gender and Sexuality (21/1/2012)

• This house will endorse the 'Slutwalk' campaign
• This house supports the idea of paternity leave
• This house believes that women in developing countries should embrace reproductive tourism

Round 6: 'Why this Kolaveri Di?' (21/1/2012)

• This house believes that school libraries should not stock the Harry Potter series of books
• This house will tolerate nudism in beaches and public pools in India
• This house will allow all communities to freely use the n-word

Octa-finals and Novice quarters: 'Love thy neighbours, debate their motions ' - Debates pertaining to SAARC countries (22/1/2012)

• This house will not arrest fishermen who cross national maritime boundaries
• This house will prosecute the perpetrators of the 1971 conflict in Bangladesh
• This house believes that armies should not be allowed to operate commercial ventures

Quarter-finals and Novice semis: 'People Power' - Political participation (22/1/2012)

• This house believes that constitutions should not be amended without direct citizen participation
• This house believes that corporations should not be allowed to make political contributions
• This house believes that democracies should give full voting rights to their diaspora

Semi-Finals and Novice final: 'Blackboard Jungle'- Issues pertaining to administration of higher education (22/1/2012)

• This house will not include class participation as a component of evaluation for taught courses in colleges
• This house believes that student feedback should be given weightage in decisions about promotions of faculty members
• This house believes that professional bodies should not be involved in the regulation of higher education in their respective fields

Final (22/1/2012)

• This house believes that the Prime Minister of India should be an elected member of the Lok Sabha

Motions from 2nd Jerome D’Souza Memorial Debate (Jan. 14-16,2012)

Held at Loyola College, Chennai (22 teams took part in 5 preliminary rounds and the top 8 teams proceeded to the knock-out phase of the tournament)

Motion used for demonstration debate

• This house believes that governments are justified in restricting access to the internet during violent protests

Round 1 – Indian Economic Policy

• This house supports foreign direct investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail
• This house will prefer direct cash transfers over subsidized foodgrains in the Public Distribution System (PDS)
• This house will abolish alcohol excise in all states

Round 2 – Education

• This house supports the earmarking of 25% seats for economically weaker sections in private schools [As provided under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2010]
• This house believes that universities should not be granted intellectual property rights (IPRs) over research outputs generated through public funds
• This house will prevent coaching institutes from naming successful applicants after the declaration of results of competitive exams

Round 3 – Environment

• This house believes that multilateral efforts to reduce carbon emissions are futile
• This house believes that restrictions on the use of plastic bags are counter-productive
• This house believes that the consent of affected communities should be a precondition for proceeding with large infrastructural projects

Round 4 – History-writing

• This house will de-emphasize nationalism in the history curriculum for schools
• This house believes that Delhi University’s decision to drop A.K. Ramanujan’s essay ‘300 Ramayanas: Five examples and three thoughts on translation’ from its history curriculum was justifiable
• This house supports the ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ (TRC) model for post-conflict societies

Round 5 – Foreign affairs

• This house believes that the time is ripe to invade North Korea
• This house believes that the United States should give Guantanamo Bay back to Cuba
• This house believes that banks should not disclose the identity of their customers in spite of requests made by foreign governments

Quarter-finals – Gender

• This house believes that single working women should be exempted from paying personal income tax
• This house is skeptical about ladies-only compartments in public transport
• This house believes that single-sex schools are an anachronism

Semi-finals – Free speech fundamentalism

• This house believes that there is nothing wrong with the ‘paid news’ phenomenon
• This house believes that that there can be no such thing as hate speech in a liberal democracy
• This house believes that news-providers should not face criminal liability for inaccuracies in news-reporting

Final – Tolerance

• This house will abolish residency requirements for immigrants seeking citizenship
• This house believes that minority run educational institutions should not be given special treatment under the law
• This house believes that Western liberal democracies should not restrain the functioning of Sharia courts