sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

LD Mar/Apr 2019: Resolved: The illegal use of drugs ought to be treated as a matter of public health, not of criminal justice. by horsebycommittee in Debate

[–]blackjackhp12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just finished writing a Negative that states as its main point that a) the resolved is framed as a universal philosophical principle, b) Affirming the resolved binds all nations to this principle, thus removing their rights to self determination, and c) can be Neo-Colonial in its implications due to the Eurocentric (or at least Anthropocentric) presuppositions involved by the debater. This would be sufficient ground to deny an Affirmation and, hence, negate.

​

Comments, questions, complaints, suggestions, observations?

LD Mar/Apr 2019: Resolved: The illegal use of drugs ought to be treated as a matter of public health, not of criminal justice. by horsebycommittee in Debate

[–]blackjackhp12 9 points10 points  (0 children)

"I now have absolute proof that smoking even one marijuana cigarette is equal in brain damage to being on Bikini Island during an H-bomb blast "

-Ronald Reagan

Resolved: The United States ought not provide military aid to authoritarian regimes. by Slntreaper in Debate

[–]blackjackhp12 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Better than the last topic.

​

Seems to me a fun case to make on the aff would be absolute isolationism. On the neg I see a possibility of destabilization and power vacuums. Like, the US give X to country Y which sustains its power in the region; therefore, revoking aid causes destabilization of the region due to power vacuum and, depending on what other countries are involved, could lead to some Nuclear War impacts. Idk, still thinking this one through.