Question number 6 on my blogger poll asked this; Do you ever find yourself wishing people would not always leave comments that agree with you?  What I should have asked was, Would you like comments that start a debate?  I don’t think it would have changed my poll results but I do think some people might have understood better what I was asking. 

55 people said they would not like comments that would disagree with what they had posted.  Most of these bloggers did say that they hoped who ever left a comment would be honest, and that if someone disagreed with them that they would do so in love. 

4 people said they would like to receive comments that didn’t always agree with them.

I do know if I wrote things and got negative comments I would not be offended. I know sometimes other people have said things that have opened my eyes to something I didn't see.

I think there are several reasons for such a lopsided result. 

1. As stated by this blogger:  … I don't think that this is the forum for that.
2. Most people want encouragement, and don’t want confrontation.
3. I’m not sure people really understand the meaning of debate.

When asked if they like debates, many people will answer no.  When I ask why, they say it’s because it just leads to ugliness, mud slinging, and decides nothing.  They get this impression from political leaders and zealous apologists.  The fact is these are not debates.  It’s a show of force, shoving an ideology down your opponents throat, and dancing around the questions put to them.  They get ugly because the people involved don’t know how to control themselves, as well as let it become an emotional agenda.

Here is the definition of debate: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

At first glance many people will point out the words contention and argument as reasons for not liking debate.  So lets take a look at contention and argument.

Contention - a point advanced or maintained in a debate or argument. 

Many people view contention as something that causes stress, and unfriendly relationships.

Argument - a reason given in proof or rebuttal or discourse intended to persuade.

In this instance one who is debating is arguing FOR his cause, not WITH the person he is debating against. 

In a debate both parties have a goal to set forth their case for why their idea is better.  It is mainly supported by facts, and some opinion. 

Today “debating” parties set forth their goal as righteousness and it is filled with emotional exchange.  Very few facts are involved, and they like to skirt the questions put to them.  They do this for several reasons: 

1. Since it’s not a real debate they did not prepare themselves for the inevitable questions that result from their comments.  Since they didn’t prepare for it they don’t know how to answer it, so avoid it behind mumbo jumbo that they hope gives the impression that they are intelligent and that the audience is to dumb to know what just happened. 
2. Since their arguments are not based on facts, they don’t have any facts to rebut with.  Again leading to the above mentioned mumbo jumbo dance.
3. They don’t even know what they are really debating about.  Which once again leads to that ever popular with politicians, the MJ boogie. 

My Papafather loved debate.  So much so that once he got one started, mid stride he would change his position over to his opponents side.  Not because he was wishy-washy, but because he could argue either side.  That’s what a good debater can do.  Why?  Because the argument is based on facts, not emotions.  It didn’t mean that Papafather actually believed that the other side of the coin was correct, but he could make you believe that he did.  This really caused a lot of confusion for those he was debating with! 

I have a very good friend that I have debated with on a couple of occasions.  In the end we agreed to disagree.  We are still very good friends.  Our debates have never become heated fights where one or the both of us wind up in tears.  Instead we each state our case, we listen to the answers and questions put to us and then refute them. 

I have been in several Bible study groups where a different opinion is thrown into the ring.  Everyone sits there and looks at that person as if he just developed a large tumor on the side of his head but they are afraid to bring it up as that might cause attention to the problem.  After a moment of silence, what was said is completely ignored and they move on with their happy little “discussion”.  The trouble is they don’t learn anything.  They are happy in their ignorance (the ingnorance of not knowing how to defend their stand with scripture,) and happy to have others agreeing with their thoughts because that makes them right.  They don’t like waves against their carefully built house on the sand. 

If you don’t agree with someone in a Bible study then back it up with scripture (the facts).  Point out why you don’t agree with verses and even with some experiences.  If you have a leg to stand on then your thoughts will be seen as credible.  If not be prepared to take a surfboard with you, because you’ll be swimming soon.  I have learned a lot through debate, because the person who I was listening to had something to say, not an ego to protect.  You’ll have learned how to back up what you believe if you have your facts straight and ready.  

So, that brings me to a thought, should I start a debate blog?  We could start really simple and small, like what is healthier, the oatmeal cookie or the fig newton?  Work our way up with, which is more destructive, fire or water?  Finally, we could hit the big time, homeschool or unschool; eclectic or canned; unit study or classical? 

What do you think?