Speech and Debate


Speak Out NC
 
HomePortalFAQRegisterMemberlistLog in

Share | 
 

 Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case

Go down 
AuthorMessage
Alex4JC

avatar

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

PostSubject: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:59 pm

Affirmative Case:

Intro:
ďAs I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy.Ē This quote by Abraham Lincoln shows that he did not want to be ruled over by one person, nor did he want to be the single ruler over people. One of the ways to avoid dictatorship is through popular sovereignty, which is why I agree with this yearís resolution. Resolved: A governments legitimacy is determined more by itís respect for popular sovereignty than individual rights.

Definitions:
Before I go any further, I must define a few key words in this yearís resolution.

1. Government: The exercise of authority over an organization, institution, state or district.
2. Legitimacy: The quality or state of being legitimate
3. Respect: To feel or show honor or esteem for
4. Popular: of or carried on by the common people or all the people
5. Sovereignty: The state or quality of being sovereign
6. Right: That which a person has a just claim to; power, privilege, etc. that belongs to a person by law,
nature or tradition.

Values:

1. Control:
My first value for this debate case is that of control. A legitimate government must have control of itís people and of the situations at hand. If a government loses itís control over itís people, they can overpower the government and take control.

2. Equality
My second value in this debate case is that of equality. Only a government that was elected by equality of opinion from itís people. A government that ensures equality to itís people with basic rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and a government that has control of itís people and the situations at hand is legitimate.


Contentions:
1. Individual Rights Differ
Everyone has different views of basic rights, such as: life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness. You may say that the way to achieve life is to live life to the fullest by doing whatever you please. However, I may interpret the right to life as the ability to live and thatís it. You may say that liberty is to do whatever you like without accordance to the law. However, I might say that liberty is freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom itself! As you can see, people interpret their basic rights much differently than someone else might! How can we be equal if we cannot agree on basic rights?

2. A Government Must have Control Over Itís People
I do not mean that a government must enforce heavy judgment on itís people in order to keep control, I simply mean a government must not let the rights of itís people surpass the law. For example, beginning in 1966 Saddam Hussein began to slowly gain power in Iraq partially because the government did not maintain control over the group that Saddam was apart of. The president at the time resigned because of constant pressure fro Saddam. Once Saddam became president he put several members of his family into important positions in the Iraqi government. He used those family members to his advantage and he killed many people he perceived as threats. So you can see, if the government does not control itís people and restrain them to the law, they will rise in power and cause destruction.

3. A Government Must Strive to Keep Equality of Basic Rights Among itís People
Not only must a government maintain control over itís people in order to be legitimate, it must also distribute equal basic rights to all of itís people. If a government takes away the rights of an individual in order to restrain him, that government is not legitimate. The government, however, cannot provide the same rights to every person, but if the government upholds and individuals basic rights, than it is legitimate. Voltaire sums up my point in a quote: ďAll the citizens of a state cannot be equally powerful, but they may be equally freeĒ.

In conclusion, a government must have control over itís people and must strive to distribute the basic rights equally. ďEqual rights for all, special privileges for noneĒ -Thomas Jefferson ďBefore God we are equally wise and equally foolish.Ē -Albert Einstein




Back to top Go down
View user profile
ali_n.

avatar

Number of posts : 58
Age : 22
Location : reality - its a lovely place but i don't like living there
Humor : original fairytales: death, horror, now sweet dreams kids!
Registration date : 2010-09-01

PostSubject: Cross - X question(s)   Sun Nov 21, 2010 9:21 pm

How candifferent interpretations of rights get in the way of equality? I am not really seeing the connection there.

You defined "Legitimacy" as: "The quality or state of being legitimate", but that really doesn't help or clarify becuase we don't know what "Legitimate" actually means.

Just for case help, it might be good for you to cite your sources for the quotes and definitions.
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:33 am

1. If different interpretations are allowed, then one individual may recieve more benefits from that particular right than another individual.




Ps. Thanks for the heads up. I thought about defining "Legitimate" but I wasn't sure. And I will be sure to put the sources on the case.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sam Chase

avatar

Number of posts : 42
Age : 21
Location : Clayton, NC
Humor : Mmmmmmmmokay?
Registration date : 2010-09-01

PostSubject: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:43 am

According to your definition of the right to life, you believe that somoene who is living is excercising their right to life?
You also say that a government is legitimate if it gives the governed certain rights, such as, the right to life, correct?
Do you agree that the American government illegitimized itself by saying that slaves were property, not people?
Did slaves exist?
So they were alive?
So they were excersising their right to life?
So the government was legitimate because they allowed the slaves to have their right to life?
(This was all one train of thought. Sorry if it gets confusing.)
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:56 am

1. Where in my case did I give a definition for "right to life'"?
2. A government the ensures basics rights to it's people is legitimate
3. No
4. Yes
5. Yes
6. Their government (at the time) did not ensure their right to life
7. Once again, the slaves were not OUR people. Once they became free citizens of the United States they were given basics rights
to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
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: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 8:34 am

  1. Did Joseph Stalin have control over his people?
  2. Was his government legitimate?
  3. Should you murder me? Why or why not?
  4. TSA pat-downs are at the airport where the traveler doesn't wish to go through scanners that see through your clothes. The pat-down consists of touching almost every part of your body pushing your clothes to see that you don't have anything on you. Do you think that these methods invade a person's privacy?
  5. Is America a legitimate government? If not, why?
  6. Are some rights generally agreed upon? (e.g. life)
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:19 am

1 & 2. I have no idea who Joseph Stalin is or what he did so I don't know if he had control over his people or if his government was
legitimate
3. No. Because I believe murder is not a resolution to an argument.
4. Yes and No
5. Yes
6. Generally, 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: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:44 am

For question one and two, how about Mao or Hitler?
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: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:50 am

Alex4JC wrote:

4. Yes and No

Could you explain your answer? It can't be yes and no unless you mean different parts of it.
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: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:10 am

  1. Should we uphold morality?
  2. Do you like liberty for yourself?
  3. In history, has popular sovereignty overstepped individual rights?
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:47 am

1. Hitler had control over his people by force.
2. No. Hitler did not have a legitimate government.
3. You have asked a difficult question. The first time I believe you were asking a "yes or no" answer. The question cannot simply be answered "yes or no". The full body scanners are for the protection of the passengers. I would say Yes, they are invading an individual's privacy in order to keep many more people self, including yourself. If these body scanners were not in use, terrorists (or anyone) could simply hop onto a plan with a bomb or gun and blow the plane up. Now, think of it this way: You sacrifice your privacy for your life. Sacrifices must be made by individuals in order for equality of rights (in this case, life). So, these body scanners may be taking away your right to privacy temporarily but they prevent one person (or more) from taking away the right to live from many people.
4. yes
5. yes, as long as it is in accordance to the law.
6. Please clarify what you mean...
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: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:10 pm

#3
Couldn't that use a less invasive means like they have been using up until very recently? In other words, before these scanners they had scanners that wouldn't be able to view you naked.
Do you think we should use the newly instituted pat-downs?
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:26 pm

I'm sure one day that will be possible, but for now this is the best way to do it. Now hold on, they don't view you naked they see shapes (which are easily determined body parts).

I disagree with the pat-downs. I don't think the full body scan and the pat-downs are both needed. Because the reason for the full body scanners is to see if there is anything inside a human (i.e a bomb), something the magnetic scanners could not pick up. So, there really is no need to be physically checked after you have been scanned unless there is something wrong with the machine or there is some suspicion.
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: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:57 pm

Actually, they almost do view you naked at least that's what I understand about it. Anyways, the pat-downs are only used if the person doesn't want to or TSA workers believe it is necessary. A lot of people are mad about this. So could you give me a final answer in light of this.
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:00 pm

I'm sorry. As I said before, I cannot give you a simple answer.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Bethany

avatar

Number of posts : 80
Age : 20
Location : I wish Disney World...in a Treehouse Villa
Humor : hmmm.....Mrs. Gray Perhaps...
Registration date : 2010-08-26

PostSubject: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:10 am

Which value did you choose, Alex?
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Fri Dec 10, 2010 8:25 am

Umm, I think I'm going with the value Mrs. Gray suggested: Democracy
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sam Chase

avatar

Number of posts : 42
Age : 21
Location : Clayton, NC
Humor : Mmmmmmmmokay?
Registration date : 2010-09-01

PostSubject: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Fri Dec 10, 2010 10:11 am

I wrote a brief on democracy. maybe you could go over it and make your case better.
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:12 am

Thanks Sam. I'll do that.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Bethany

avatar

Number of posts : 80
Age : 20
Location : I wish Disney World...in a Treehouse Villa
Humor : hmmm.....Mrs. Gray Perhaps...
Registration date : 2010-08-26

PostSubject: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Fri Dec 10, 2010 1:46 pm

Alex, where did you get those definitions?
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: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:25 pm

Webster's new world dictionary. Why do you ask?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Alex Hendrix's Affirmative Case   

Back to top Go down
 
Alex Hendrix'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
» BREAKING NEWS: MYSTERY ILLNESS KILLS ALEX JONES' FAMILY MEMBER & SICKENED MORE OF THEM..
» 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: