Underlining

Underlining is a common card-cutting technique. Cards may contain material that is useful for context, but does not need to be read in-round. Debaters will often mark which portions of the card to read by underlining them. Underlining around unnecessary text is generally seen as superior to omitting it altogether (e.g., with ellipses), because the text is still available for the opposing team to examine. This makes it harder to take evidence out of context.

It is generally considered acceptable to read only portions of sentences, or even string together several sentence fragments into one statement, provided that doing so does not change the meaning of the quote and the original complete text is available for examination.

Example
In the example card below, the underlined portions are intended to be read straight through, ignoring the non-underlined portions as if they didn't exist:


 * Hegemony helps prevent nuclear war


 *  Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad (PhD, defense analyst at RAND, former US Ambassador to the United Nations), 1995 , "Losing the Moment? The United States and the World After the Cold War", The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 2, accessed December 21, 2012


 * "Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power system. "

Variations

 * Instead of underlining the portions to read, some debaters strike out the portions not to read. Many debaters consider this unsightly.


 * Unread, non-underlined text may be printed in a smaller font size, or sometimes a lighter color, to save space and make the visual distinction between read and unread text clearer.

Controversies
While underlining is generally accepted, a small number of people believe that it is unethical to verbally combine non-continuous portions of a quote into one block. Still others believe that any underlining at all is unethical.

Proponents generally respond that a similar practice, the use of ellipses to string together discontinuous quotes, is frequently used in law journals and other academic publications. They argue that if a debater uses underlining to misrepresent the author's intent, the problem is with the debater, not the underlining; 99% of the time, underlining is a perfectly legitimate tool.