Skip to content

Details

We often talk about love, loyalty, and the sanctity of vows, but the landscape of human relationships is rarely a sun-drenched meadow. It's more often a labyrinth, full of convenient compromises and unspoken arrangements. Think of those grand, old marriages of convenience, where fortunes and titles were exchanged and affection was, well, optional. These unions were built on foundations far more solid than fleeting emotion, and the silent contract was often with appearances themselves, rather than the person beside you.

This brings us to the stark territory of infidelity. We tend to cast a harsh light on cheating, a clear breach of trust, but is it always so black and white? When we explore the clandestine and the forbidden that fulfill needs unmet elsewhere, we tread into morally complex terrain. Tonight, we're dissecting the nuances of cheating, the motivations behind it, the perceived 'innocence' of various liaisons, and whether the act itself, or the contexts surrounding it, truly alter the ethical calculus of betrayal. Let's delve into the uncomfortable choices and the very definition of fidelity.

This debate will follow a British Parliamentary format with eight debaters split into four teams of two.

Participants who wish to speak are highly encouraged to bring a paper and pen. You are welcome to participate even if you have no prior debating experience.

We aim for debates that are respectful, constructive, and welcoming:

  • Respect ideas and people Listen actively, stay quiet while others speak, and debate arguments, not identities or beliefs.
  • Be concise and civil Keep questions short and relevant; avoid hostility, hate speech, or discrimination.
  • Respect boundaries and time No unwanted advances or suggestive behavior; arrive on time to avoid disrupting the debate.
  • Follow moderators They guide the discussion and ensure fairness.

Related topics

You may also like