Positions

Plural marriages should not be legalised as they can have severe consequences for the persons involved and also the state. For example, wives are often mistreated in plural unions. What’s more, the state would have to introduce legislation to ensure all aspects of marriage are fair and that plural unions are afforded similar rights to two-person marriages.

This position holds that the blame is misplaced: hotter, drier and longer seasons, wind driven fire and the placing of houses in flammable country explain the worst losses, so a forestry frame mistakes the cause.

This position holds that preventive war can never be justified. Opponents argue that it rests on predictions that cannot be verified, that it amounts to aggression against a state that has not attacked, and that it destroys the rule limiting war to self-defence.

This position holds that prisons should not be abolished. It argues that prisons are crucial to protecting the lives of innocent people, that they do work to keep dangerous offenders off the streets, and that the threat of prison deters would-be criminals.

This position holds that protests rarely change anything, because a crowd expresses feeling without presenting a decision anyone is obliged to take, and because visible pressure often hardens the opposition it is meant to move.

This position holds that psychics are not real. It argues that there is no scientific evidence for psychic powers, that self-described psychics rely on cold-reading techniques and intuition to glean information, and that they prey on vulnerable clients desperate for someone to listen.

This position holds that psychopaths cannot be cured. It argues that psychopathy is a personality disorder rooted in innate factors — genetic predisposition and physical differences in brain structure — so the underlying pathology cannot be reversed by treatment, only at best managed.

This position holds that shared public space depends on expectations nobody has to negotiate individually. On this view those who use the street cannot consent in advance, so a baseline rule about clothing is set for them, children included.

The cost of tertiary education is too high to expect the taxpayer to bear.

This position holds that being quarantined need not harm mental health. It argues that the time can be turned to positive ends — pausing to reflect, learning a new skill, spending more time with one's children, or decluttering the home — yielding good mental-health outcomes.

This position holds that racism can never be justified. It distinguishes unavoidable unconscious bias from the deliberate act of justifying prejudice — which it says only entrenches racial hierarchy — and contends that racism, as structural power, is often mistaken for individual discrimination.

This position holds that recessions are not always bad. Though painful, it argues they can trigger necessary corrections—adjusting inflated markets, eliminating inefficiencies, prompting innovation, and opening the door to policy reform—ultimately fostering a more robust economy.

Although recycling helps the environment to some extent, its success is blown out of proportion. Some materials can’t be recycled, and there’s still waste being poured back into the environment.

Without the positive force of religion to bring people together and provide them with moral guidelines, society would not be as cohesive or productive as it is today.

This position holds that schools should not teach religion, because a public system cannot handle contested beliefs without favouring some over others, and because religious formation belongs to families and congregations instead.

This position holds that religion licenses using the environment for our own ends, via the 'dominion' view. It argues that God made humans superior to the rest of creation, granting them supremacy over the natural world — so the environment exists for its instrumental value to people.

This position holds that rent caps are not a good idea. It argues they fail at their basic aim of keeping rents affordable—accelerating gentrification, lowering the quality of rental units, reducing the number of properties available, and disadvantaging new renters trying to find a home.

This position holds that representative democracy is better than direct democracy. It argues that citizens cannot realistically grasp every policy issue, that direct votes are too time-consuming and open to populism, and that it makes more sense to elect officials to decide on the public's behalf.

Ride-hailing apps are bad for the environment. At least 40% of the time, drivers travel alone from one drop off point to the next pick up location. This adds more miles, contributing to more congestion and vehicle emissions that wouldn’t exist without ride-hailing.

This position holds that rioting is never justified. It argues that violence, looting and arson seriously harm the very communities they claim to defend, surrendering the moral high ground — and that those who riot are often unconcerned with the cause peaceful protesters genuinely advance.

This position holds that schools should not be able to ban books. It argues that schools have no business policing what children read — that banning books suppresses diversity, attacks free expression, is outdated, and deprives students of books that can be their best teachers.

Eurocentric curriculums restrict students to one narrative, usually a white narrative. These outdated curriculums need to be replaced with more progressive, racially inclusive lesson structures.

This position holds that armed guards introduce new dangers into a school - accidents, escalation and the disproportionate policing of some pupils - while doing little to deter a determined attacker, and that they change what a school feels like.

This position rejects strict dress codes, holding that detailed rules on fit and coverage fall almost entirely on girls and that a school which regulates them is placing responsibility for other people's attention on the students being looked at.

This position holds that governments should not spend more on scientific research, because public money is finite and has competing claims on it, and because the way research funding is allocated rewards grant-writing and caution rather than discovery.

This position holds that even a sentient artificial intelligence should not hold human rights. Opponents argue that such rights are grounded in human embodiment, mortality and membership of a human community, and that sentience alone cannot be verified from outside.

This position holds that service cannot be refused on religious grounds. It argues that the law, not personal faith, is the highest authority, that religious freedom must not be exercised in ways that harm others, and that allowing such refusal is no different from refusing a mixed-race couple.

This position holds that sex education should not be taught in schools. It argues the decision belongs to parents, that it can clash with religious beliefs and let teachers push an agenda, that it may encourage promiscuity, and that it wastes valuable class time.

This position holds that Shakespeare's writing belongs to his own time and place, not the ages. It argues that the linguistic gap between the 16th century and now leaves him dated, that some of his work is exclusionary and bigoted, and that his plays are formulaic products of their era.

This position holds that short films are not worth watching. It argues that they provide fewer jobs, cannot easily be shown in theatres or turn a profit, and that their brevity leaves no room for the character development that makes feature films rewarding.

Those who hold this position argue that smart phones are not making people smarter: that constant retrieval replaces understanding, that the devices are built to fragment attention rather than to inform, and that access to answers is not the possession of knowledge.

This position holds that social media is not being used to target disenfranchised voters in swing states. It argues that social media's influence on voters is exaggerated, that most Americans were not exposed to fake news in 2016, and that claims of voter suppression are overstated.

Those who hold this position argue that schools should not ban social media: that students need to learn to manage platforms they will use all their lives, that bans are unenforceable and costly to a school's authority, and that the platforms also carry learning and support.

Social networking sites contribute negatively to society as they, among other things, risk spreading misinformation, adversely affect personal life and health, and put personal data at risk.

This position holds that socialism is neither ethical nor advantageous. It argues socialism infringes on personal rights and hands the state too much power, chiefly by taking away private property and the individual freedoms that ownership is meant to protect.

This position holds that we do not need manned space flights because they are too dangerous. It argues that the probability of a crewed expedition failing is unacceptably high, and that long-term radiation exposure and the psychological toll of space travel pose lasting risks to astronauts.

The approach needs freedom from current constraints to work and cannot provide monetary value to an organization in the near term

This position holds that the likeness is one of form only. Fandom borrows the outward shapes of religion, its gatherings, songs and sacred places, but asserts nothing about what is true and imposes no account of how a life should be lived.

Those who hold this position argue that standardised testing should not be abolished: that a common measure is what lets an outsider be recognised, that the alternatives rely on judgements favouring the well-connected, and that the problems lie in how scores are used.

This position holds that startups should not take venture capital. On this view the money arrives with a mandate for rapid growth and an exit, which displaces the founders' own aims and makes a sound, profitable business count as a failure.

This position holds that Stephen King's novels are not sexist. It argues that he portrays women as strong and triumphant — frequently building his stories around resilient female protagonists who overcome adversity rather than reducing them to objects or victims.

This position holds that straight people should stay out of gay bars, because the point of such a venue is to be one room where its patrons are the majority, and because a large straight presence changes the atmosphere that made it worth having.