Let’s Debate

What do Abraham Lincoln, Alexander Campbell, and Charlie Kirk all have in common?

For one, they all had a lot of people who disagreed with their positions on various ideas. Sometimes the opposing beliefs were fiercely held. In the case of both Lincoln and Kirk, people who disagreed with them took the horrible action of assassinating them.

But what they had in common that I admire was their willingness to engage in a practice that is rare in our day: debate.

There are places where debate is found, of course. In fact in the United States, where one could be forgiven for thinking that “debates” only happens around presidential elections, there is a national debate tournament. It is the largest academic tournament of any kind, according to the hosts. This year more than 7,000 students from more than 1,500 schools across the country will participate. They will use more than 750 classrooms in the Richmond, Virginia, area as they debate various topics.

The National Speech & Debate Association is holding the event June 14 – 19, 2026, in Richmond. Their goal is to help young people become “effective communicators, critical thinkers, and engaged citizens.” Anyone involved in looking for future leaders for companies or political parties might want to drop in on that event.

Debates also happen on college and university campuses in both America and England. Those aren’t just students at the podium, either, they are often invited guests who are scholars or spokespersons for various causes. I applaud all of that, and I’m making a plea for more.

Moving from neutral

In order to have a useful debate, you need a topic to debate. Typically that topic is one that affects a lot of people, one in which there are dramatically opposing views, each of which might make good sense, and one in which people can be persuaded by powerful words well presented.

One such issue in America — before it was the USA — was whether or not to declare independence from England. This was, to put it far too mildly, a very big deal.

Many of us today might be a little fuzzy on how that all went down. History is easy to forget, so allow me to touch on a highlight or two.

• The Colony of Virginia was the first British Colony in America that survived, and it was founded in 1606. That was 420 years ago.
• The Mayflower Compact, a document for governance that was written by Puritans who had landed in America, was signed in November, 1620.
• The Second Virginia Convention was held in March, 1775 to elect representatives to the Second Continental Congress, to be held in May, 1775.

It was at that Second Virginia Convention — in Richmond — that a debate was held on what position their representatives would carry to the congress. One of the most famous debate speeches was delivered there by Patrick Henry (pictured above). It ended, “I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

My point is that the British American Colonies had been voluntarily and without interruption part of England for more than 170 years. No one took declaring independence lightly, and many of those who lived in America were opposed or neutral to it. Modern estimates suggest that no more than 40-45% of colonists actively supported the Patriot cause. Perhaps 15-20% were Loyalists, and the rest were neutral.

As is often the case — and this is important to remember — debates about independence were not held to change the minds of the committed. Their purpose was to move the neutral to one side or the other. Where there is an overwhelming majority, there is little need for debate.

What we do now

About 80 years after the Colonies became the States, there was a series of debates between two men who were running for a U.S. Senate seat representing Illinois. The year was 1858, and the men were Senator Stephen Douglas and a former one-term congressman, Abraham Lincoln.

The primary topic of those debates was slavery, a practice Lincoln opposed. There were nine debates, all in Illinois, but because of the topic they were national news. Douglas was a master orator and debater. Few could have stood toe-to-toe with him, and most would say that Douglas “won” the debates. He was, in fact, re-elected to the Senate by the Illinois legislature. But Lincoln’s profile rose considerably, and two years later he became the Republican candidate in the 1860 presidential election. His primary opponent in that election was Douglas, who came in second in the popular vote.

In their debates, Lincoln and Douglas spoke for hours, both in their speeches and in their rebuttals.

Today we don’t seem to have time for a sixty-minute speech and a ninety-minute rebuttal. We need to get back to… something, so just give us the sound bites. Find us a line or two that says what we want to hear, and we’ll make a reel of it and put it on X.

Some people are speechless while other people write headlines because of a single line spoken by a political or business figure. Where is the context? Was it serious, was it satire, did it have substance, or was it merely surface? We will never know, because instead of debating and appealing to minds, we now appeal to opinions driven by emotion. How does that change minds? It doesn’t.

The shooter of Charlie Kirk answered logic with emotion, as John Wilkes Booth answered Lincoln. Those “I’ll show you” responses are light-years behind the “I’ll answer you” of debates.

Pure emotion without debate persuades the neutral to remain neutral, and even persuades the convinced to become neutral. Progress is hard because too few of us engage in “effective communication, critical thinking, and being engaged citizens.”

Let’s cheer for the National Debate Tournament, and pray that their example will rise up and influence how we talk about what we care about. Emotional screeds, whether personal or political, will only divide us. Let us debate and grow together.

Do good. It’s in you!