Thursday, Dec. 21, 2006 | 7:23 a.m.
The day opened with the highly controversial topic of marriage. The question posed was this: Should there be a constitutional amendment defining marriage?
The consensus was against the idea that an amendment needed to be created, but many felt it should be better defined. One argument was based on the Tenth Amendment, which states that the people should have any power not delegated to the United States government by the Constitution.
Another argument was that marriage is a religious doctrine and should not be defined by the government, which would disgrace the meaning behind the celebration. This brought about the argument of gay rights, which was evenly divided among the students.
Some believed that because marriage is a religious doctrine, it should be held to those standards, excluding same-sex marriages. Others felt that it would be a matter of civil rights. They felt that same-sex couples deserved the benefits given to married couples, such as tax benefits, and offered that they should be allowed to marry.
When the question came up of America's ability to accept a female or minority president, the students were not as unanimous. In a society more accepting of female rights, this was not a male versus female discussion.
Many females and males alike felt that a woman president would be as capable of running the nation as any male, but they believed that American society was not ready. It seemed to be a matter of tradition and the inability to accept change.
Some believed that American society was ready. They brought up the argument that in some countries that have male-dominated societies, women leaders are thriving. The topic of a minority president was brought up only briefly, with one student commenting that minorities in high political positions, such as Colin Powell, have had a successful career and could also prosper as president. Others felt that this was another issue of tradition, and America would not be ready.
One issue brought up was whether English should be the national language of the United States. Recently Pahrump has asserted English as its official language. The students were again split. Those for English being the national language thought it would help unify America, that it would improve everyday operation and efficiency. These students also felt it unfair that they should be expected to speak Spanish in border states.
Those against the idea felt it was discrimination and that it is not fair to discriminate against the other cultures of America by claiming English as the national language. They also felt that it would send the wrong message to immigrants. This was refuted by the argument that in Europe many countries have national languages. A middle ground was suggested that there be two official languages. But the problem with this would be choosing which language would accompany English.
Another highly controversial topic brought up was the question of abortion. This topic divided the students. Those who supported abortion argued that life begins after the first trimester - so as long as it is before the first trimester, it is not technically killing the baby. Many refuted this argument, stating that life began at conception and at any time it was murdering the baby.
Some students were concerned that if the mother is raped, she should have the choice of having the baby. Others felt the baby should have a choice, too.
In the political arena today, the country is divided between Republican and Democrat. This held true in the Sun Youth Forum. But what is also beginning to show in American society is a large blending of these two groups.
People can no longer be defined by their political party. Some students who are for same-sex marriages, typically a Democratic stance, were also downright against abortion, usually a Republican stance. This shows that students are thinking for themselves and not, as Bill O'Reilly puts it, "drinking the Kool-Aid."
archive
