Spar Debate One Outline

Topic: Is Honesty the Best Policy 

Position: Affirmative 

SPAR Method Positions 

END TEXT HERE

• Affirmative opening speech (90 seconds) 

Hello, my name is James Cottingham. Today I will be arguing on the side of honesty and integrity. “Every lie is two lies, the lie we tell others and the lie we tell ourselves to justify it.” Today  

I’ll be arguing on a universal truth to almost all religions abide by, and a fundamental principle to coexist with one another as human beings. I’ll consider the truth as a lifesaving foundation, covered, and protected in a court of law, I’ll consider honesty as not only a preference, but a duty that I as a human being owe to everyone in this room. Honesty is the best policy, for it can help your marriage, your friendships, and ideologies.  

• Cross-examination by the negative (60 seconds) 

In response to the argument my opponent has made, I can’t argue that there isn’t some validity in his thinking. However, when we look at the statement “honesty is the best policy,” we can see that this statement is very vague. Without further clarification, we must deduce that it means honesty is the best policy in every situation. The truth is important, there is no debating this, but is telling the truth and only the truth in every situation realistic, or even ethical? My point is that the ethics of honesty and dishonesty rely on the situations we are put in. There are some circumstances where we are obligated to tell the truth, but we have to ask ourselves, are we telling the truth to help others or just to help us feel better about our self, by following our own morals, disregarding the negative effects the truth can have on others? The real world isn’t as black and white as this statement would like to make it out to be. There are times that telling the truth is important, but there are also times where the damage the truth causes makes telling the truth a less viable ethical option.  

• Negative opening speech (90 seconds) 

Hello, my name is Jacob Bennett, and today, I will be arguing on the more realistic side, the side that understands the complex social situations all of us go through on a daily basis. Now, I won’t stand up here today and tell you that being dishonest is a good thing to do on a regular basis. What I’m telling you today is that just because someone tells the truth, it doesn’t mean that action is just immediately considered ethical. In reality, the truth hurts, and being honest all the time means that you will hurt a lot of people. When encountering a situation that requires us to consider whether to be truthful or dishonest, is it not reasonable to consider the consequences of both actions? For example, if someone was to ask you about your lifestyle, but you know the truth would harm you in some way, is it better to still give someone personal details in your life, knowing they could use that against you later on? To be blunt, not everyone needs to know the truth about you, especially when it doesn’t concern them or hurt them in any way. I am aware that lying and the act of dishonesty is vilified in almost every society in the world, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t situations where being less than one hundred percent honest is the more viable option. There are times where it better to be dishonest to protect yourself, your family and loved ones, or even your friends and colleagues. There are times when being dishonest can be the best ethical choice, and the phrase “honest is the best policy” does not convey these complexities we face in our daily lives.  

• Cross-examination by affirmative (60 seconds) 

My opponent should carefully consider that while a white lie may seem viable, not telling your spouse a misdoing or not giving the judge the whole story while testifying in a court of law, may not only be dangerous but deadly. One must not simply lie to save one’s feelings, but moreover if you continually lie to a loved one, one should question the legitimacy of that relationship indefinitely. I have a responsibility as a human being to not lie to my opponent, because “it takes strength and courage to admit the truth” Does the audience not want to live a life of valor and respect? 

• Affirmative closing speech (45 seconds) 

If one is asked to cover up a crime, perhaps one of monumental stature – one should consider, will this have criminal repercussions if I do? What happens if I get caught committing perjury? Will this lessen or worsen my situation? It has been time and time again, “Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom” so why lie? Tell the truth and you will sleep better at night, and live a long and healthy life one can be proud of. 

• Negative closing speech (45 seconds) 

Unlike my opponent today, I’m not going to give the benefits and negatives of your own personal situations and the answer as to what you should do, to tell the truth or not. All I ask you to do is to really examine the situations you all are put in and to make the best decision for yourself and the other parties involved. Do not blindly follow this saying in order to feel better about yourself or your morals, just understand the ramifications of your actions and use your best judgment. The world isn’t black and white, and any statement portraying it this way should be held to the highest scrutiny. Thank you for your time.