The Literific left a motion free for members to decide what they wanted to debate during the year – passed around a suggestion box and we had some great ideas ranging from the death penalty and tearing up the Good Friday Agreement to Zayn being the best member of One Direction and others that would probably get our website banned!
Thanks to all that contributed to the vote and the motion is: This House Would Stop Queen’s University, Belfast Students’ Union Having Referenda.
This motion is following some controvery over recent motions put forward by the SU council at QUB and we will be challenging this on Thursday the 6th November in the QUB Senate Chamber.
If you would like more information FB, tweet us or email firstname.lastname@example.org.
As always all members of the community are welcome to come to the event: membership is £5/£10 for associate members and this is a one time fee. All events are free 🙂
Even if you haven’t been before, or haven’t attended for a while come along and watch the event; no pressure to speak as the majority watch the debate and some get involved with points of information or questions.
See you Thursday 🙂
The 19th Ordinary Meeting of the 165th Session of the Literific took place on the 20th of March in the Senate Room.
Vincent Wooding, Jack Thompson and Naomh Gibson spoke in proposition. Wooding argued that it is unfair to trust a person to do things within society but not allow them the ability to choose how they die. Thompson explained active and passive euthanasia to the House and that dying is a phase. He said that doctors have become good at extending the dying phase which is not in the best interests of the patient. Gibson question how learned the proposition were. Instead of worrying about the required model she asked the House to concentrate on the right to control the last part of your life when so much is out of your hands.
Sammy Wade, Nathan Cantley and Nathan Anderson opposed the motion. Wade argued that it would undermine the basic function of the legal and health authorities which exist to protect life. Cantley said that society is confused about the right to die, that there are no guidelines and no framework for us to be able to support it. Anderson said that everyone has their own perspectives on it but that he believed vulnerable people should be given the best possible care as opposed to the right to die.
The floor debate ensued, summaries were heard and after a vote the motion passed.
The 17th Ordinary Meeting of the 165th session of the Literific took place on the 6th of March in the Senate Room. Our guest chair for the evening, Professor John Brewer, had a few opening remarks.
Ryan Jones and Andrew Carruthers proposed the motion. Jones argued that internment is a legitimate tool of war and that the only more effective alternative is extermination. He said it may have been evil but there was no other way to deal with insurgency. Carruthers said that interment showed the people the immorality of Britain and that this forced them to make their voices heard. t forced the people to demand more.
Katy Waller and Harry Adair took centre stage to staunchly oppose internment. Waller told the House that internment took away the rights of stability and movement. Instead of protecting the people, it encourages them to see the state as something to be feared. She said that something that takes rights away should never be seen as necessary. Adair then closed the debate. He said internment was detrimental to community relationships. The alternative to internment, he argued, was to not put innocent people behind bars.
Professor Brewer then summarised and commented on the speeches. Closing statements were heard and the House then went to a vote. The motion was defeated.