[eDebate] ???Overturning Roe v Wade????

[NEIL BERCH]

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.
--Neil Berch
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 

>as

>well:

>

>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 

>think

>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 

>should

>be consulted about this issue), but that is not as important as the fact 

>that

>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 

>pornography),

>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 

>the

>activity? There is only a risk that some womyn will feel personally 

>excluded

>emotionally or intellectually from this debate, thus decreasing female

>participation. Because this is a womyn's issue, as you yourself have 

>mentioned,

>of course it will effect womyn in this community and the fact that womyn 

>were

>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 

>would

>effect womyn in the community is major oversight.

>

>Nicole Richter

>University of Miami

>

>_______________________________________________

>eDebate mailing list

>eDebate at ndtceda.com

>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate