Personal tools
 
Views

Welcome to Debatepedia!

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 02:52, 23 May 2011 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Revision as of 23:52, 23 May 2011 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

Next diff →
Line 33: Line 33:
*'''[[Debate: Seattle deep-bore tunnel| Seattle deep-bore tunnel]]''' - April 13th, 2011. *'''[[Debate: Seattle deep-bore tunnel| Seattle deep-bore tunnel]]''' - April 13th, 2011.
*'''[[Debate: Should the US arm Libyan rebels?| Should the US arm Libyan rebels?]]''' - April 2nd, 2011. *'''[[Debate: Should the US arm Libyan rebels?| Should the US arm Libyan rebels?]]''' - April 2nd, 2011.
-*'''[[Debate: High-speed rail| High-speed rail]]''' - March 30th, 2011.[[Image:Map of the world.jpg|right|300px]]+*'''[[Debate: High-speed rail| High-speed rail]]''' - March 30th, 2011.[[Image:Map of the world.jpg|right|200px]]
*'''[[Debate: Mandatory military service| Mandatory military service]]''' - March 26th, 2011. *'''[[Debate: Mandatory military service| Mandatory military service]]''' - March 26th, 2011.
*'''[[Debate: No-fly zone over Libya| No-fly zone over Libya]]''' - March 15th, 2011. *'''[[Debate: No-fly zone over Libya| No-fly zone over Libya]]''' - March 15th, 2011.
Line 74: Line 74:
<div style="margin:0;background:#6C8FB9;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:120%;font-weight:bold;border:1px solid #010101;text-align:left;color:#000;padding-left:0.4em;padding-top:0.2em;padding-bottom:0.2em;"> The Global Debates Competition </div> <div style="margin:0;background:#6C8FB9;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:120%;font-weight:bold;border:1px solid #010101;text-align:left;color:#000;padding-left:0.4em;padding-top:0.2em;padding-bottom:0.2em;"> The Global Debates Competition </div>
-[[Image:The Global Debates Banner.jpg|right|300px]]+[[Image:The Global Debates Banner.jpg|right|250px]]
Debatepedia has developed resources for '''[http://theglobaldebates.org/ The 2010/2011 Global Debates]''', an online debate competition organized by the International Debate Education Association, in partnership with the UN Foundation and National Forensic League. Debatepedia's resources include a '''[[Global Debates Migration Portal]]''' as well as a pro/con article for the topic: '''[[Debate: UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families| Ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families]].''' Interested high school students can register for the competition [http://theglobaldebates.org/take-action/register-for-the-global-debates/ here]. Debatepedia has developed resources for '''[http://theglobaldebates.org/ The 2010/2011 Global Debates]''', an online debate competition organized by the International Debate Education Association, in partnership with the UN Foundation and National Forensic League. Debatepedia's resources include a '''[[Global Debates Migration Portal]]''' as well as a pro/con article for the topic: '''[[Debate: UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families| Ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families]].''' Interested high school students can register for the competition [http://theglobaldebates.org/take-action/register-for-the-global-debates/ here].

Revision as of 23:52, 23 May 2011

http://www.nflonline.org/

Debatepedia is essentially the Wikipedia of debates. It is an encyclopedia of pro and con arguments and quotes. A project of the 501c3 non-profit International Debate Education Association (IDEA), Debatepedia utilizes the same wiki technology powering Wikipedia to engage you and other editors in centralizing arguments and quotes found in editorials, op-eds, books, and around the web into comprehensive pro/con articles. This helps citizens and decision-makers better deliberate on the world's most important questions. Debatepedia is endorsed by the National Forensic League.

The Debate Digest

A steady supply of our latest and most refined pro/con articles to help you deliberate, take a stand, take action, vote, and back yourself up.

"California Bans Trans Fat" (2009)

Featured pro and con arguments from this article:

  • PRO: Trans fats are uniquely bad for human health "Ban Trans Fats." Washington Post Editorial. November 6th, 2006: "The evidence that doctors and public health experts presented makes you think twice about picking up a Whopper: Trans fats, which are chemically engineered, decrease levels of desirable cholesterol while increasing harmful cholesterol; they increase dangerous inflammation that can contribute to the onset of diabetes; and they harden artery walls, which increases blood pressure. Trans fats are much worse than even naturally occurring -- and still very unhealthy -- saturated fats such as those found in butter. Dariush Mozaffarian, a Harvard cardiologist and epidemiologist, calculated that up to 22 percent of heart attacks in the United States are the result of trans fat consumption."
  • CON: Government should inform citizens, not ban trans fats "Banned foods and misinformed consumers." Los Angeles Times. June 20th, 2008: "rather than ban HFCS or trans fats or any of these unhealthy foods, it would be far more effective to embark on an aggressive campaign to education consumers -- much as we've done with tobacco. In the case of trans fats, consumers need to understand what these substances are, why the industry uses them and what the consequences are. If information on trans fats and other "bad" foods were provided within a broader program of nutrition awareness, consumers might gradually eliminate the use of trans fats voluntarily, in the same way that many people have rejected tobacco. I also suspect that, as the public became more fluent in the language of diet and nutrition, the food industry would be less and less inclined to use such ingredients."
Recent Debate Digest articles

See Past Debate Digest topics

Editorial News and Tasks

This section features strong work done by Debatepedia editors. Consider joining their efforts. User Guide. See Recent changes for all recent community edits.

See Past editorial news and tasks | Follow recent edits and updates on Twitter | See other editing tasks you can do.

Debates In The News
  • Return of Israel to pre-1967 borders US President Barack Obama said on May 19th that he was committed to the pre-1967 borders as a starting point for negotiations on the Palestinian-Israeli border, re-elevating the debate on the subject to center stage.NPR article on subject.
  • Enhanced interrogation techniques: Following the killing of Osama bin Laden, with useful information obtained through interrogation techniques, some have argued that it was "enhanced interrogations" that lead to Osama bin Laden's death. This has lead to renewed debate over the practice.
  • Should the West arm Libyan rebels? and No-fly zone over Libya have been in the news big time since the conflict began in March. Debatepedia's resources are excellent on these topics.
  • Nuclear energy rose into the limelight once again as a debate, following the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, which damaged over four nuclear power plants and threatened to cause a national and global nuclear fallout.[2]

More Debates in the News

The Global Debates Competition

Debatepedia has developed resources for The 2010/2011 Global Debates, an online debate competition organized by the International Debate Education Association, in partnership with the UN Foundation and National Forensic League. Debatepedia's resources include a Global Debates Migration Portal as well as a pro/con article for the topic: Ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families. Interested high school students can register for the competition here.

Category Browser

Browse through Debatepedia's main categories to explore its contents and areas of interest to you. Go to Debatepedia's Main categories to see all of its categories, portals, and other contents.

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.