Speech and Debate


Speak Out NC
 
HomePortalFAQRegisterMemberlistLog in

Share | 
 

 Alex's Affirmative case

Go down 
AuthorMessage
ARandazzo

avatar

Number of posts : 12
Age : 21
Humor : Tim Hawkins
Registration date : 2010-08-26

PostSubject: Alex's Affirmative case   Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:34 pm

Alex’s Aff. Case
Attention getter: you are deciding for your family what to cook for dinner. You know the majority likes fish, not everybody... so you decide to spend your time ask everyone individually what they want. The result, everyone wanted different food and you end up with no conclusion, no time, and no dinner. Why you ask yourself. Because you chose to spend all your time, energy, and efforts, communicating with individuals rather than spending your time accomplishing your initial goal. Making the decision for the popular sovereignty rather than the individuals would have allowed your time energy and efforts to be used towards accomplishing a goal rather than researching it... that is why popular sovereignty determines the legitimacy of a government
State resolution: a governments’ legitimacy is determined more by its respect for popular sovereignty than individual rights.
Value(s): communication
Definitions Government: the system by which a nation, state, or community is governed, the action or manner of controlling or regulating a nation, organization, or people, defined by Oxford dictionary.
Legitimacy: to make legal, lawful, defined by dictionary.com
Determined: processing or displaying resolve, defined by oxford dictionary
Popular sovereignty: the doctrine that sovereign power is vested in the people and that those chosen to govern, as trustees of such power, must exercise it in conformity with the general will. Defined by dictionary.com
Individual rights: Individual rights are distinct from civil or legal rights as these are rights granted by government to citizens and will vary with the organization and administration of governments. Defined by: Babylon dictionary
Points:
1 point: Popular Sovereignty is the foundation for the legitimacy of a government. In order for a legitimate government to exist it must benefit the individual rights of the people of the nation. In order for the government benefits for the people it must have time to execute them. Communication is the key to accomplish these benefits. The time it takes to communicate with every individual would defeat the ability to execute the benefits. Communicating with the popular sovereignty allows for less time in the communication process and more time for the execution. Therefore communication with the popular sovereignty creates the time needed to benefit and therefore provide for the individual; which leads to an affective government; which then leads to a legitimate government. I know you will agree with me that popular sovereignty is the foundation for a legitimate government then serves its people’s individual rights.


2 point: The most powerful nation to ever exist is built on the strength and power of popular sovereignty. The United States, the most powerful nation in the world, is built on the belief of protecting, providing and serving the individual’s rights through the effective tool of popular sovereignty. However, my opponent will try to argue that the use of popular sovereignty can actually be used to set up a government that does not benefit the individuals’ rights. And yet, I ask you... would this, by definition, be a legitimate government. The answer is simply NO. I am here to tell you a legitimate government is only legitimate if it is actually protecting and providing for its people’s individual rights. The United States voting system is set up to give its determining authority to the popular sovereignty through electoral votes, which in turn determine who is elected in office. The government, once elected, is sworn to uphold the responsibility to protect and provide for its people’s individual rights. Therefore the mission is accomplished; the legitimacy of this government is established through the power of popular sovereignty.
So to look back, I believe you will agree with me and my contentions, that popular sovereignty determines the legitimacy of a government, over individual rights.
I now stand ready for cross examination.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.christianfriendsproductions.com
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 9:27 pm

So, communication with popular sovereignty leads to the individual being provided for, which leads to a legitimate government? That is the basis for your first contention (point), right?

How did you tie your value of communication into your second contention? I didn't really see it there.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
AshleyEaton

avatar

Number of posts : 50
Age : 22
Location : Mars
Humor : Anything witty or fun or silly (not super picky)
Registration date : 2010-08-24

PostSubject: reply   Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:50 pm

Do you agree that a legitimate government can be dfined as: a lawful nation, state, or community which is governed, controlled or regulated?
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: Alex's Affirmative case   Tue Nov 23, 2010 12:08 pm

Would you agree that the United States was not a legitimate government before they broke away from England.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
AshleyEaton

avatar

Number of posts : 50
Age : 22
Location : Mars
Humor : Anything witty or fun or silly (not super picky)
Registration date : 2010-08-24

PostSubject: Re: Alex's Affirmative case   Tue Nov 23, 2010 1:23 pm

of course not they weren't even a national government they were a colony
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: Alex's Affirmative case   Tue Nov 23, 2010 1:29 pm

I wasn't asking you Ashley.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
AshleyEaton

avatar

Number of posts : 50
Age : 22
Location : Mars
Humor : Anything witty or fun or silly (not super picky)
Registration date : 2010-08-24

PostSubject: Re: Alex's Affirmative case   Tue Nov 23, 2010 1:46 pm

haha right sorry
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sam Chase

avatar

Number of posts : 42
Age : 22
Location : Clayton, NC
Humor : Mmmmmmmmokay?
Registration date : 2010-09-01

PostSubject: Re: Alex's Affirmative case   Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:20 pm

I choose to define communication as constant connection to the will of the people. My opponent did not define his value, so mine now stands as the only option.
Do you agree that it is impossible for a government to be in constant connetion with the will of the people?
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   Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:30 pm

@ Sam Chase

um... Might I ask, where did you get that definition?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sam Chase

avatar

Number of posts : 42
Age : 22
Location : Clayton, NC
Humor : Mmmmmmmmokay?
Registration date : 2010-09-01

PostSubject: Re: Alex's Affirmative case   Tue Dec 07, 2010 2:56 pm

to be honest christian, i made it up. but it has to do with communication, and it could stand as a definition. therefore, it will be used for the round.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Alex's Affirmative case   

Back to top Go down
 
Alex'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: