Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[0]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[0]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[0]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-11 00:16:08.697
	1	+2017-02-11 00:16:08.0

Caselist.CitesClass[0]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,22 @@
	1	+In order for there to be inclusivity of minorities and a safe learning environment there must be a negation of the resolution. Resolved: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech.
	2	+The value must be societal- wellbeing because this allows for the maximization of good and is the basis for which a just society stems from. Without achieving well- being individuals will not have access to social participation. This oppresses certain groups of a society and harms the growth of minorities.
	3	+Allin, Paul. "Economic and Labour Market Review." National Statistics, 2007.
	4	+Subjective wellbeing and participate in society.
	5	+In the status quo minority voices do not have access to what well-being and the ability to have a positive social and mental state and are able to participate in society since their voices are silenced. Hence my standard of promoting the inclusivity for minority voices in order to achieve the well-being they need in order to be a part of the society that they live in.
	6	+The affirmative will always silence minority voices thus decreasing societal- wellbeing since well-being is dependent on participation of individuals. When there are limits on certain groups to participate in society they become oppressed and social- wellbeing is not maximized for the benefit of all.
	7	+Contention1. Majority groups can’t understand hate speech. Look to Minority views for a true evaluation. In the status quo of white supremacy there cannot be a discussion of racist speech. Because the majority view excludes the voice of the minority any argument to allowing unrestricted speech is going to further harm the inclusivity to the minority. This is problematic for two key reasons:
	8	+1. When not including minority voices in a discussion about the minority the majority opinion becomes more exclusive. This harms well-being as it ostracizes the minority for social participation.
	9	+Ma, Alice K.March 1995. Campus Hate Speech Codes: Affirmative Action in the Allocation of Speech Rights. California Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 2 (Mar., 1995), pp. 693-732.DA=7/11/16.-SVJK)
	10	+Lawrence argues and an early age.”
	11	+2. Hate Speech only increases when there is no punishment of it and encourages people to participate in that hate speech. This solidifies the social identity of minority groups and makes hate speech even more common and even justifiable. This is empirically proven through several social experiments.
	12	+Delgado, Richard, and David H. Yun. "Pressure Valves and Bloodied Chickens: An Analysis of Paternalistic Objections to Hate Speech Regulation." California Law Reveiw, 1994.
	13	+Hate speech may and their attentions.
	14	+Thus there must be a discussion that includes the minority opinion and that values it over the majority who has never had the experience it tries to relate with, this is the only way to achieve minority inclusivity. There will never be a change in hate speech if minority voices continue to be suppressed.
	15	+In order to understand the experience of the minority I provide a dialogue in which the experience of those who are oppressed in society is expressed.
	16	+Lawrence, Charles R. "If He Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus." JSTOR. Duke University School Of Law, 1990.(1)
	17	+African and found offensive?
	18	+There is no benefit to allowing this type of dialogue to continue. It is creating more chaos all around the world.
	19	+In order to solve for the hate speech that is oppressive there has to be a limit to what can be said on the campus.
	20	+Lawrence, Charles R. "If He Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus." JSTOR. Duke University School Of Law, 1990.(2)
	21	+Minority delegates to the 1989 ACLU Biennial Convention proposed and community is aware of and concerned about issues of equality as well as free speech.
	22	+Thus if there is a regulation of speech that is enforced in a just way as to ensure that there is no extreme limitations of the speech, but that there is awareness and punishment for hate speech there can be a balance of both the concerns to the market place of ideas and the protection of minorities inclusion in society.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-11 00:16:10.257

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+IDK

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+IDK

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+0

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Clark TX Jasani Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Trad Neg

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Jesuit