OUR VIEW: Logic persuades better then anger

After observing the furor of Wednesday’s battle between supports of traditional marriage and those who came to boo them, it seems likely many students are left thinking both sides were immature.

Political activism is a wonderful thing, especially at a university where students too often don’t vote or read newspapers. Exploring current hot-button topics is an important part of education. But too many students walked away Wednesday with anger rather than thoughtfulness.

Sure, reporters love to cover protests where people are in each other’s faces and there are plenty of shocking quotes to be heard. Events like that get more attention than anything else. But there are two important things to consider: One, it’s more helpful to get positive attention than negative attention, and two, it’s damaging for middle-ground people to hear angry, improvished accusations, directed toward both sides, which may or may not be true.

In a formal debate, with pre-arranged speakers and a moderator, participants make more of an effort to present reasonable, factual arguments. Emotion plaus a part in debates but generally takes a back seat to logic.

The debate on same-sax marriage last Friday is a great example. The debaters covered a wide range of ideas and arguments. The arguments were organized, sources were cited and there was no cake to throw.

But the dissenters Wednesday were frustrated because they couldn’t respond to ideas they considered grievously wrong. Feeling powerless, many resulted to shouting insults at organizers.

The College Republicans got permission to set up their own event and control the microphone. But next time, maybe it would be better to hold a debate where both sides agree to let each other speak, and where reason rather than emotion is the choice of weapon.