I love having older kids. Here's what we did after dinner tonight.
1. An impromptu debate - that houses should not have doors.
Chairperson - Micah (who is keen to be a speaker next time)
Affirmative : 1. Simone 2. Andrew 3. Simone
Negative : 1. Joel 2. Nathan 3. Joel
The affirmative argued that the purpose of doors is to separate people from each other and that this is bad for society and bad for individuals.
The negative argued that doors are useful for safely (keeping wild beasts out etc) and to protect us from the weather.
The affirmative rebutted the negative team, arguing that there are other ways of protecting ourselves against wild beasts (we could build a mote or get a guard dog) and that we should embrace the weather that God sends rather than hiding ourselves from it.
The negative team offered the rebuttal that a mote is a door by another name and that if we thought we should 'embrace the weather God sends' we should also do away with walls and roofs.
The chair was undecided about who won the debate, but agreed that points should be taken from the affirmative team because their third speaker offered no new arguments (she had run out!)
2. Watched the Gruen Transfer Pitch that Australia should invade New Zealand.
Most of us liked the second pitch best. "New Zealand. 100% there for the taking. 100% Ours"
Good times.
We agree. The second ad was funnier and more clever.
ReplyDeleteWe think we will be keeping our doors, because no-one seriously addressed the need to maintain traditional values like having a front door to knock on when you are visiting!
Sorry, but even if you hadn't run out of arguments, the negative team could have used, "I don't want to see you on the toilet and you don't want me to see you on the toilet." And I liked the rebuttal of doing without walls and a roof. :-) So for my vote the negative team won.
ReplyDeleteAnd I think you mean "moat" (a water filled ditch), not "mote" (a speck).
Bet you're glad they didn't watch it this week. Or did you?
ReplyDelete