Personal Attacks in Debate

[Guest Scared]

Can anyone elaborate on what is considered a personal attack?

Recently in a board meeting I believe this went on (and on and on and on) from a person I consider a 'board bully' in a room full of people (other board members) who are not well versed in the rules of debate, and did nothing to stop it.

[Guest Scared]

And also...is telling someone they have made a personal attack, a personal attack in itself?

[Hieu H. Huynh]

"The measure, not the member, is the subject of debate." (see RONR 11th ed., p. 392)

[Richard Brown]

From the introduction to RONR, you might find this rule from the British House of Commons instituted in 1604 noteworthy:  "Decorum and avoidance of personalities in debate: 1604. He that digresseth from the Matter, to fall upon the Person, ought to be suppressed by the Speaker. ... No reviling or nipping words must be used. (p. 157.)"

 

RONR discusses decorum in debate more fully on pages 391-394 and also on page 253.

[Josh Martin]

Can anyone elaborate on what is considered a personal attack?

 

I'd suggest reviewing the rules of decorum in RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 391-394.

 

And also...is telling someone they have made a personal attack, a personal attack in itself?

 

If a member is violating the rules of decorum, the person to tell is the chair (by raising a Point of Order), not the offending member. Raising a Point of Order regarding a violation of the rules of decorum does not, in and of itself, violate the rules of decorum.

[Chris Harrison]

Raising a Point of Order regarding a violation of the rules of decorum does not, in and of itself, violate the rules of decorum.

...Though what the member raising the Point of Order said when making the Point might violate decorum.  It would not be violating decorum to say "The member violated decorum by [attacking another member's motives/used disparaging language about another member/etc]".  On the other hand, it would violate decorum if the member said, "Mr. X violated decorum because he lied when he claimed that Dr. Y only wants this motion adopted because he stands to benefit financially!"

[Guest Scared]

Thank you everyone for the clarification...