fandomhigh_ooc | OOC and IC: Friday Ethics Debate - Tara, Shep, Beka, Cameron, and Rory

For convenience, I'm creating this post for us to OOC and IC hash out the debate stuff.

I'll place a link to either the Ethics classroom or Study Hall or the Perk or something for the IC stuff once we get going, to provide an IC chrono context for the discussions.

Tara-mun, you're included, in case we have OOC questions, but more until we get the sitch with Shep's ankle and his replacement, if any, straightened out.

I'll be AFK for an hour or so. Otherwise, jump on in. And whomever gets assigned in Shep's place - jump on in. I'll change the subject line to include you as soon as I know who you are. :D

As a reminder, this is the assignment:

First speaker, Affirmative - defines the key words, outlines the arguments his or her team will be making, and begins to address them.
First speaker, Opposition - briefly rebuts (disagrees with) the points 1A made, outlines their own team's arguments, begins to address them.
Second speaker, Affirmative - briefly rebuts 1O, gives the body of the team's argument.
Second speaker, Opposition - briefly rebuts 2A, gives the body of the team's argument.
Third speaker, Affirmative - rebuts all the arguments of the Opposition, in detail. May add one new argument if appropriate.
Third speaker, Opposition - rebuts all the arguments of the Affirmative, in detail. May not add any new points.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

"Okay, no." Cameron frowns. "That's definitely where the lawful gets shady."

"Euthanasia is definitely a good question. I'm sure it'll come up."

Rory pulls out a pen and throughtfully chews on the tip. "Definitely. Should we amend our definition to include only able-bodied persons in control of their own mental faculties?"

"That's probably a good idea, yeah." Cameron nods. "Although you might want to watch out with that definition as you don't want to let the mentally handicapped fall under it too."

"Actually, I'm not sure. Because by your arguments before, we're not going on a legal definition. It's still wrong if the people don't have full control...it's just whether they're going to get the same punishment."

"Right," Rory agrees, nodding. "So maybe...people who are aware of their own being? Something like that?"

"Something like that," Cameron frowns and rubs his forehead. "I don't think it makes the definition all of a sudden legal if we do that. So it should be good?"

"Should work," Rory agrees, looking over the notes. "I think we're set as far as the definition. Do we have any other thoughts as to how this'll go?"

[ooc: No worries. Go sleep!]

"I dunno, Rory." Beka sighs and blows her bangs off her forehead. "If we need to say murder is wrong in all circumstances...Yeah, I guess we want to define out people who can't form an intention. That's how I'd phrase it.

"As for how it'll go... I've no idea. We need to make a set of arguments in support of the claim. Then abstract them for the first speaker to use. From there, the second person makes the arguments in full. The third person has the least scripted job. They rebut, and can add one new argument. I'm good on my feet usually, and I can do that third spot. If we want."

Rory nods. "I can take the second, then. So, how should we support our claim? Start with arguments about the value of human life, et cetera? Move on to explain the exceptions as found in our definition?"

Beka rolls her eyes. "This is not my strong suit. I think we have to start with the definitions and the question. Establish a framework."

She sighs. "Rory, we're going to lose this debate. I can justify murder sixteen ways to Sunday if we move outside a human framework. I think we need to play to Cam's suggestion that no matter who you are, you don't want to die. But even that... even that I can argue against."

Rory sighs. "Every life has meaning and justification, and who are we to judge when it's someone's time to die?"

She rolls the pen across the table and back again. "If we can argue that no one wants to die, and that every life has some kind of meaning - even if we aren't able to see it - I think it might work."

"I agree. Everything life and unlife has meaning, and everyone strives to maintain that state of being, that's a good basis for the argument. Because I think, even Angelus, has to agree to that."

Rory smiles. "If he objects, we can always check that the blood he drinks does come from things that were once alive. Hence, meaning - no matter how small."

[ooc: I will love you forever if you do, since I'm caught up in like five threads]

Beka grins. "I suspect he prefers to drink it from still living beings. Good thought, Rory. I'll hold that for the whammy at the end."

OOC and IC: Friday Ethics Debate - Tara, Shep, Beka, Cameron, and Rory

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out

Re: IC Hash Out