a. Is cancel culture a valid form of protest?

Affirmative Side Points:

Promotes Accountability: Cancel culture can hold individuals and organizations accountable for their actions, especially
when they've engaged in harmful behavior or made offensive remarks.

Empowers Marginalized Voices: It gives marginalized communities a platform to voice their concerns and demand change
from those in positions of power.

Cultural Evolution: Cancel culture can drive societal change by challenging outdated norms and promoting more inclusive
and progressive values.

Cancel Culture - Positive Side Questions:

How can we ensure that cancel culture effectively holds individuals and organizations accountable for their actions?

In what ways can cancel culture empower marginalized voices and promote social change?

Are there examples where cancel culture has played a crucial role in cultural evolution and challenging outdated norms?

What safeguards can be put in place to ensure that cancel culture adheres to principles of fairness and justice?

Can cancel culture be seen as a legitimate form of protest when it amplifies the voices of those who have been historically
silenced?

Negative Side Points:

Lack of Due Process: Cancel culture often bypasses legal due process, potentially leading to unfair consequences for
individuals accused without proper investigation.

Overly Harsh Punishment: It can sometimes result in disproportionate consequences, causing job loss or reputational
damage that may not align with the severity of the offense.

Inhibits Free Speech: Cancel culture can create a climate of fear where people self-censor to avoid backlash, potentially
stifling open dialogue and debate.

Cancel Culture - Negative Side Questions:

How can we prevent the lack of due process and potential unfair consequences associated with cancel culture?

Are there instances where cancel culture has resulted in disproportionately harsh punishment, and how can this be
addressed?

What are the potential dangers of cancel culture in terms of inhibiting free speech and open dialogue?

Is there a risk that cancel culture might undermine the principles of presumption of innocence and rehabilitation?

How can society strike a balance between accountability and avoiding the stifling effects of cancel culture?

b. Is it more financially rewarding and fulfilling to pursue a traditional career path or to start and run a business?

Affirmative Side Points:

Stability and Benefits: Traditional careers often offer job security, benefits, and a steady income, providing financial stability.

Skill Development: Many traditional career paths provide opportunities for skill development, career advancement, and
specialization.

Predictable Income: A regular paycheck allows for better financial planning and can reduce financial stress.
Financial Reward - Positive Side Questions:

In what ways can traditional careers provide stability and financial benefits for individuals and their families?

How do traditional career paths offer opportunities for skill development, career progression, and specialization?

Can a predictable income from a traditional career lead to better financial planning and reduced financial stress?

What role do traditional careers play in providing benefits such as healthcare, retirement plans, and job security?

How do traditional career paths contribute to the overall economic stability of a society?

Negative Side Points:

Entrepreneurial Freedom: Starting a business can offer the freedom to pursue one's passion and innovate in ways that
traditional careers may not allow.

Unlimited Earning Potential: Successful businesses can generate substantial wealth and provide greater financial rewards in
the long run.

Personal Fulfillment: Entrepreneurship can be more fulfilling as it allows individuals to make their own decisions, take risks,
and see the direct impact of their efforts.

Financial Reward - Negative Side Questions:

Is there a risk that pursuing a traditional career path might stifle entrepreneurial freedom and innovation?

What are the limitations of traditional careers in terms of unlimited earning potential?

Does the predictability of income from a traditional career sometimes come at the cost of personal fulfillment?

Can traditional career paths lead to a sense of stagnation and lack of control over one's destiny?

How do traditional career paths contribute to the perpetuation of traditional societal norms and values?

c. Should the government be allowed to watch what people do online to keep the country safe, or is it an invasion of
privacy?

Affirmative Side Points:

National Security: Monitoring online activities can help identify and prevent potential threats to national security, such as
terrorism and cyberattacks.

Legal Frameworks: Governments can establish clear legal frameworks and oversight mechanisms to ensure responsible and
targeted surveillance.

Public Safety: Surveillance can help protect citizens from online crimes, including fraud, harassment, and child exploitation.

Government Online Surveillance - Positive Side Questions:

What are the key benefits of government surveillance of online activities in terms of national security?

How can governments establish responsible legal frameworks and oversight mechanisms to ensure ethical surveillance?

In what ways can online surveillance protect citizens from crimes such as cyberattacks and online harassment?

Are there examples where government online surveillance has been essential for preventing terrorism or other threats?

How do we strike a balance between personal privacy and the need for government surveillance to maintain public safety?
Negative Side Points:

Invasion of Privacy: Mass surveillance without consent can violate individuals' fundamental right to privacy, undermining
democratic values.

Potential for Abuse: Government surveillance powers can be abused for political purposes, leading to suppression of dissent
and erosion of civil liberties.

Chilling Effect: Widespread surveillance can create a climate of fear and self-censorship, hindering free speech and open
discourse.

Government Online Surveillance - Negative Side Questions:

How can we safeguard individuals' right to privacy when the government is monitoring online activities?

What measures can be implemented to prevent the potential abuse of government surveillance powers for political
purposes?

Are there concerns about the chilling effect that widespread online surveillance might have on free speech and open
discourse?

Can we trust that government surveillance is transparent and accountable enough to protect individual rights?

What are the potential long-term consequences of sacrificing privacy for the sake of security through government online
surveillance?

d. Should LGBTQ+ couples have the same rights and opportunities as heterosexual couples when it comes to adopting
children?

Affirmative Side Points:

Equality and Non-Discrimination: LGBTQ+ couples deserve equal rights and opportunities, including the ability to adopt
children, to combat discrimination.

Child Welfare: What matters most is the well-being of the child, and many studies show that LGBTQ+ parents can provide
loving and stable homes.

Legal Recognition: Granting adoption rights to LGBTQ+ couples aligns with the principles of legal recognition, fairness, and
inclusivity.

LGBTQ+ Adoption Rights - Positive Side Questions:

In what ways does granting LGBTQ+ couples equal adoption rights promote fairness and social progress?

Can we ensure that children's well-being is prioritized while granting LGBTQ+ couples the same adoption rights as
heterosexual couples?

Are there examples where LGBTQ+ parents have provided loving and stable homes for adopted children?

How can we strike a balance between respecting religious beliefs and ensuring equal rights for LGBTQ+ couples in adoption?

Does granting LGBTQ+ couples equal adoption rights contribute to a more inclusive and diverse society?
Negative Side Points:

Traditional Values: Some argue that children are best raised in heterosexual households based on traditional family values.

Religious Beliefs: Opponents may cite religious beliefs as a reason to restrict adoption rights for LGBTQ+ couples.

Concerns for Children: Critics may express concerns about the potential impact on children raised by LGBTQ+ couples,
although research largely refutes these concerns.

LGBTQ+ Adoption Rights - Negative Side Questions:

Is there a risk that granting equal adoption rights to LGBTQ+ couples could erode traditional family structures and values?

Should we prioritize the interests of heterosexual couples in adoption based on historical norms and societal expectations?

Are there legitimate concerns about the potential impact of LGBTQ+ parenting on the well-being of adopted children?

How can we ensure that religious beliefs are respected in adoption matters without discriminating against LGBTQ+ couples?

Can we strike a balance between ensuring equality and considering the potential complexities of adoption by LGBTQ+
couples?