Debate...

Last Friday 29th of September was our last debate in the ESU Debate Tournament. We lost against Santiago College in the first round of playoffs. It was a tough debate, in which we had to defend that "security supercedes freedom". We defined the terms as "in extreme situations", but the word "extreme" didn't favoured us at all, so the other team objected it and told us that it would be impossible for them to defend their position if we defined the terms like that. And it is our job to present a case that is possible for the other team. 

We said that in typical days they are not antagonic, therefore neither security nor freedom should supercede the other one. Our examples were seatbelts, helmets, wars, earthquakes, crime: in all of them, you "freely" choose to put your security above your freedom. You are free to go to the streets in the wars, but it's not safe, so you don't do it, giving your security more importance than your freedom. 

In what I didn't agree with the judge, was that she believed when the other team said about our examples, thay they were "exceptions", because then what is "common"? Life is based on those "exceptions"...It's not an exception a war or an earthquake, and as we said before, in the "common" life, they are not antagonic, therefore no one of them should supercede the other. 

But we got eliminated, and will not have another debate until next year, when I hope we have a better performance and, hopefully, win for our school!