nincompoop
  • nincompoop
Should Presidential debate include science debate section?
OpenStudy Feedback
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
jamiebookeater
  • jamiebookeater
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
nincompoop
  • nincompoop
https://youtu.be/NYy7pL4RrbA
imqwerty
  • imqwerty
yes!!! it should :)
e.mccormick
  • e.mccormick
The president's job is to carry out the laws that are made by congress. No more. No less. These debates, in general, are about what laws they support or oppose. While the veto factor makes that something of an issue, the entire presidential election system has been misdirected for years to point at law creation rather than enforcement. The truth is, we should be far more concerned with how the president is going to carry out the laws. As for creation of laws, yes, that is an important topic... for when you want to look at a member of Congress. So in what sense are you talking about science? Where in the realm of government?

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

nincompoop
  • nincompoop
I am glad you asked. Be made aware that this discussion is focused on the United States of America. The president besides enforce the law, also passes laws. By having science-related debates, future leaders act as a role-model (trickle-down model) that promote and encourage future generations to be scientifically literate as well as critical. This is particularly crucial in promoting the viability and ultimately the posterity of the state, which encompasses the welfare of its citizens. Here are the hot topics that many government officials tend to be oblivious about or something they dodge and give the most obscure responses when asked. The attitudes of our leaders have stifled and stagnated research studies and also created this sense of little to no importance. Evolution Vaccination Stem-cell Climate-change GMO's Alternative energy source. Here are some problematic medical treatments allowed by law in the U.S. Homeopathic treatments Acupuncture (no matter what studies you provide, they have not been able to provide positive results on double-blind studies) chiropractic manipulation Here are some immediate social issues related to health where disparity in funding is witnessed that is also largely tied socio-economic disparity. sexually-transmitted infection family planning (birth control) access to healthcare and clinics palliative treatments for terminally-ill patients Etcetera, etcetera and etcetera...
nincompoop
  • nincompoop
So in what real of the government you asked? In every real of the governance, the posterity and economic viability of a country hang in innovation, research and technology, which all start with scientific literacy.
imqwerty
  • imqwerty
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.