Jenny and Alex are having a value debate about whether the United States has a moral obligation to accept refugees. Taking on the role of both debaters, provide an example of how the debate could play out if they both agreed on the same criteria of security.
What will be an ideal response?
There are numerous ways to answer this question. The answer should feature a value
criteria based on security. The argument then should meet that criteria. For example:
Jenny and Alex both agree to a criterion of security.
Jenny: Refugees are often escaping religious or political persecution and could be subjected to
death. Thus it is a matter of refugees’ personal security to take them in.
Alex: While refugees are often fleeing terrible circumstances, the United States must prioritize
national security of its citizens before the security of non-citizens. As such, the United States
should err on the side of caution and prevent refugees from coming in until they are fully vetted.
You might also like to view...
Critics of the Narrative Paradigm fault it for its
A. conservative nature B. failure to actually provide an alternative to the rational world paradigm C. breadth of coverage D. All of the answers are correct.
An "I" statement should include the other person's behavior, your __________ about that behavior, and the __________ the other's behavior has for you
Fill in the blanks with correct word
While engaged in discussion, members of a small group are simultaneously senders and receivers of information.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
Scott washes his partner’s car, helps with the household chores, and runs errands. He is expressing his love through the language of ______.
A. affirmation and support B. time together C. gifts and tokens of affection D. acts of service