We have previously published some articles that have various parliamentary debate resolutions (or “motions,” depending on your league) that we think can be helpful/fun for practice. This article will be an extension of that series, with 20 additional resolutions/motions, divided up by type (fact, value, policy, and situational).
As a brief note regarding the typology used in this article: not everyone agrees on the classifications, but here I define “fact resolutions” as resolutions which do not make any direct normative claims (i.e., claims asserting “good/bad” or “right/wrong”), whereas value resolutions assert some degree of right/wrong but do not require a specific policy proposal. “Policy” resolutions involve some proposed course of action (which need not actually be a “policy” in the common usage of the term). Situational/hypothetical motions tend to technically fall under policy, but they are such a specific (and often interesting) subset that I have given them their own section (and put them first).
Lastly, it is true that some of these motions will become outdated, but they are still relevant currently so I figured I would include them.
- Suppose: A drug has been extensively tested and proven to not have any effects on people who ingest the drug EXCEPT that both they and their children have a very strong dislike of the taste of meat—a dislike so strong that they can only bring themselves to eat it if they are starving.
Resolved: This house, as a young adult expecting to eventually have children, would ingest the drug.
- Suppose: You have just been offered a position as a manufacturing executive at a cigarette company which pays $500,000/year. You will confidently be able to donate your money (in secret if you prefer). Presume that the only alternative to this job is to work as an accountant in an unimpactful paper company where you would make $100,000/year.
Resolved: This house would work at the cigarette company.
- Trump is more likely to be re-elected than not.
- The United States likely will not see substantial reforms in its gun policy within the next two years.
- China will likely become more powerful than the USA within the next half-century.
- Similarly to how modern society widely views the slavery period as morally repugnant, our current society will probably be widely seen as morally repugnant by most of society in 100–200 years (even if not to the same extent).
[Note: this does border on value, but I had to put it somewhere and it arguably does not inherently make claims about what is or is not moral]
- This house regrets the everyday usage of makeup.
- Even with the existence of school shootings, this house regrets the existence of the “school shooter personal safety industry” (including products such as bullet-proof backpacks but excluding school equipment such as metal detectors).
- This house believes that a three-party system is preferable to a two-party system.
- Libertarianism is a superior political philosophy to conservatism.
- This house would make community college free.
- This house, as a regular user of social media, would not get involved in political arguments on Facebook/Twitter.
- This house would substantially increase funding for reducing existential risk even at the expense of effective charities that address suffering in the present.
- This house, as the Republican Party, would not support another 4 years of Trump.
- Colleges should allow their core class requirements (e.g., literature/writing, fine arts, sciences, language) for liberal arts degrees to be fulfilled by (potentially unrelated) electives relevant to a student’s major.
- K–12 schools should not require/coerce students to bear witness against a peer’s infractions (e.g., cheating, drug usage) if the student did not participate/aid in the infractions.
- This house would penalize for-profit businesses that employ interns in person (as opposed to virtually) and pay them less per month than the local monthly cost of living.
[Note: if you don’t mind making the above resolution more complex, you can add the following to the end: “(although with proportional adjustments if the intern is working fewer than 40 hours per week).”]
- This house would require individuals to obtain permits to wear facial veils such as the Niqab and Burqa in public institutions (e.g., public schools, government offices, public parks).
- This house would rather ban the production and sale of all “assault weapons” as opposed to maintaining current laws on “assault weapons.” (Author’s note: assault weapons are distinct from assault rifles.)
- This house, as a developing country, would allow the formation of a charter city in its territory.