Speech and Debate


Speak Out NC
 
HomePortalFAQRegisterMemberlistLog in

Share | 
 

 Nathan's Affirmative Case

Go down 
AuthorMessage
Nathan W.

avatar

Number of posts : 57
Age : 22
Location : Earth
Humor : Tearing apart Christian's case ..uh..I mean..
Registration date : 2010-08-19

PostSubject: Nathan's Affirmative Case   Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:13 pm

Nathan Wilson’s Affirmative Case

Introduction:
When I was at a home school honor society meeting we were split into groups and given a challenge. With a role of masking tape and one hundred straws, we had to build the tallest tower, however; to be legitimate it had to be strong enough to hold a baseball, and be at least two feet tall. The different groups set about doing it in many ways, but the structure that won, was unique from all the others. To reach the legitimized height and strength, the team members realized they needed to unite the straws, making them stronger, after all, a chord of three strands is not easily broken. Not only did the team tape the straws together, to form thicker pillars, they united the pillars together to hold the ball. The resulting structure was stronger then needed, and higher then any of the others, that tried to accomplish the same thing by using single straws. If the victors had tried to use just individual straws their tower would definitely have failed, which is why I believe that resolved: the governments legitimacy is determined more by its respect for popular sovereignty then individual rights.
Now all that jargon my sound confusing to you so let me define the key terms.
Definitions:
Government: The administration of public affairs, according to established constitutions, laws and usages, or by arbitrary edicts. Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language
Legitimacy: Being in compliance with the law; lawful. American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
Determined: Concluded or decided Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language
Respect: That estimation of honor in which men hold the distinguished worth or substantial good qualities of others. Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language

Popular Sovereignty: A doctrine in political theory that government is created by and subject to the will of the people. Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary
Individual: Pertaining to one only. Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language
Rights: That which justly belongs to one. Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language
Using the definitions listed above then our definition reads; the administration of public affairs, according to established constitutions is determined more by its honor of the will of the people then of that which belongs to the one.

Value:
My value for this debate is unity which is defined as Concord or being in conjunction, for as Sallust, the great Roman historian and statesman said, “By union the smallest states thrive, by discord the greatest are destroyed.” My criterion or how I achieve unity is through popular sovereignty

Contentions: my contentions for this case are; a legitimate government must be constitutional, Constitutions are more determined by Popular Sovereignty, unity is more important to a nation’s strength and protection, and finally, Individual rights can divide a country.

1. A Legitimate Government
The definition for legitimate is lawful, or within the law, therefore a legitimate government is one that is lawful. Well what law is a government under? While some may say natural law, I would argue that a legitimate government is under a constitution. Therefore a government like in Libya, which does not have a constitution, is illegitimate. However a Government like the one in Cuba or North Korea, or even Saudia Arabia is legitimate, because it follows its constitution. My opponent may argue that Saudia Arabia is a monarchy, which is true, and therefore not legitimate. However in its constitution Article 5 clause A it states, “The system of government in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is that of a monarchy.” So having a monarchy follows its constitution making it legitimate. Remember, a legitimate government is constitutional.
2. A Constitutions are determined more by Popular Sovereignty.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Those famous words, written by Gouvener Morris, are what founded this great nation we live in. If you will notice the first phrase it says we the people of the United States. It does not say we the individuals of the un-united states it’s the people. Our constitution is founded by popular sovereignty.
We could also look back to what may be the earliest constitution written and that was the Magna Carta written for England. In it the popular sovereignty at that time, the nobles, sat King John down, and forced him to write a constitution.
Or we can go over to Cuba. Although founded on the principles of Marxism, by a brutal dictator, in Article 3 the constitution of Cuba clearly states In the Republic of Cuba sovereignty lies in the people, from whom originates all the power of the state.
Finally, if we examine the constitution of China we find in Article 2, “All power in the People's Republic of China belongs to the people.”
Clearly a legitimate Government is founded by popular sovereignty.

3. Unity is important to a nation’s strength and protection.
Even the weak become strong when they are united. Johann Friedrich Von Schiller a German Historian. Around 500 BC the Persians had conquered the Greek city states. To overthrow their common enemy the Athens, Miletus, and Eretria, united together and a great battle in sued. In the end the Greeks won a huge victory driving the Persians out of Greece and destroying their opponent’s stronghold at Sardis. This example illustrates how if a country wants to be strong it must be united. Think about the wandering Germanic tribes during the Roman Empire. They were not united and Caesar had no problem dealing with them, versus the American’s in the Revolutionary War who banded together and drove out the greatest Army in the world at that time. Clearly the more united a nation is the stronger it is.

4. Individual rights can divides a country.
United we stand, divided we fall. Yes I know I used old quote that is so overused that it is hardly worth being brought up at all, but I would like to show how it applies to this case. Individual rights divide a country. Probably the prime example of this would the Fist Continental Congress during 1775. At this congress the goal was to strengthen the unity between the thirteen colonies and make them stronger, and hopefully figure out how to deal with Britain. However what ended up happening was each state pressed forward their own rights instead of uniting, the results were almost disastrous, causing Benjamin Franklin to quote, “We must all hang together, or all hang separately.” Finally however, the congressman united together, and the result was the greatest nation in history. Another great example of how individual rights, disunites people is the American Civil War. If you read the documents of the southern men at that time of succession, they succeeded from the Union because they believed their right of a state government was taken away. This tore our country apart, and if it hadn’t been for God’s providence probably would have destroyed us. Just remember, individual rights can divide a country, versus popular sovereignty which unites it.



My opponent may say that unity is uniformity but as John F Kennedy said, “The unity of freedom has never relied on uniformity of opinion”

In conclusion, I would like my judges to remember that a legitimate government is constitutional because legitimate mean lawful. Constitutions are determined more by popular sovereignty, as is shown by reading constitutions the world over. Since constitutions are the legitimacy of the government then a government’s legitimacy is determined more by popular sovereignty then individual rights. For as the British historian John Ruskin said “Government and cooperation are in all things the laws of life. Anarchy and competition, the laws of death.” Thank you. I know stand ready for cross-examination.


Last edited by Nathan W. on Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Christian Di Lorenzo
moderator
moderator
avatar

Number of posts : 91
Age : 22
Location : Fuquay Varina, NC
Humor : Impromptu
Registration date : 2009-11-04

PostSubject: Cross-X Questions   Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:26 pm

  1. Does popular sovereignty always uphold even basic individual rights, such as the right to privacy?
  2. Do you think that you should murder me, if it was for the sake of unity?
  3. Do people agree on some individual rights?
  4. Can there be unity where people don't agree?
  5. Do people agree on everything?
  6. If Government X has a constitution, is it legitimate?
  7. Can a government with a constitution ever have bad morality and destroyed economics?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Alex4JC

avatar

Number of posts : 69
Age : 22
Location : Wake Forest
Humor : I love a good joke
Registration date : 2010-08-26

PostSubject: Re: Nathan's Affirmative Case   Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:44 pm

Your value is unity, correct? and in order for a government to be legitimate it must be united, correct? If a government is not unified (and illegitimate according to you) is it necessary for the government to remove the cause?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Nathan W.

avatar

Number of posts : 57
Age : 22
Location : Earth
Humor : Tearing apart Christian's case ..uh..I mean..
Registration date : 2010-08-19

PostSubject: Re: Nathan's Affirmative Case   Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:26 pm

To Alex: A government does not have to be united to be legitimate. It just needs a constitution.

To Christian:
1. No
2. No
3. Possibly
4. Yes
5. No
6. Yes
7. Yes
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Christian Di Lorenzo
moderator
moderator
avatar

Number of posts : 91
Age : 22
Location : Fuquay Varina, NC
Humor : Impromptu
Registration date : 2009-11-04

PostSubject: Question?   Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:36 pm

Is there such a thing as a bad constitution?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Alex4JC

avatar

Number of posts : 69
Age : 22
Location : Wake Forest
Humor : I love a good joke
Registration date : 2010-08-26

PostSubject: Re: Nathan's Affirmative Case   Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:44 pm

Then please briefly explain why your value is unity
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Christian Di Lorenzo
moderator
moderator
avatar

Number of posts : 91
Age : 22
Location : Fuquay Varina, NC
Humor : Impromptu
Registration date : 2009-11-04

PostSubject: Response   Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:12 pm

Alex4JC wrote:
Then please briefly explain why your value is unity
I think that you would synthesize the material in cross-x in your neg case. Cross-X is for questions only.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Nathan W.

avatar

Number of posts : 57
Age : 22
Location : Earth
Humor : Tearing apart Christian's case ..uh..I mean..
Registration date : 2010-08-19

PostSubject: Re: Nathan's Affirmative Case   Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:23 pm

To Chris: Yes. (You are arguing morality aren't you?)

To Alex: Do you want me to quote my whole third contention. For a government to be legitimate it needs a constitution. What I'm saying is that Popular sovereignty unites a country more then Individual rights.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Nathan's Affirmative Case   

Back to top Go down
 
Nathan's Affirmative Case
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» a contractor with pending case eligible or qualify to join our bidding?
» Bidders should not have any pending case filed against the SSS????
» BAC disqualifying bidder for losing a labor case before SC
» The Approaching Civil War #15B - Nathan Leal
» ICAI to change exam pattern for CA Course...Case Studies to form part of Questions

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Speech and Debate :: Misc. :: Speech and Debate Class 2010 :: Homework assignments :: Homework assigned on Nov 10th :: Affirmative Cases :: Affirmative Cases posted here-
Jump to: