| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,58 @@ |
|
1 |
+=Ought NC= |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+ |
|
4 |
+====Oxford Dictionary defines ought as "used to indicate something that is probable."==== |
|
5 |
+ |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+====Prefer this definition because:==== |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+====1. Predictability - Analytic==== |
|
11 |
+ |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+====2. Resolvability –==== |
|
14 |
+ |
|
15 |
+ |
|
16 |
+====a. There is no objective morality – if we debate over ethics or morality, there is no objective way to determine a winner.==== |
|
17 |
+Hellier, Coel. Professor of Astrophysics at Keele University in the UK. July 29, 2013. https://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/six-reasons-why-objective-morality-is-nonsense/. |
|
18 |
+Lastly, and actually the strongest argument of all, no-one has ever |
|
19 |
+AND |
|
20 |
+Remove that subjective human opinion and the result is — literally — nonsensical. |
|
21 |
+ |
|
22 |
+ |
|
23 |
+====b. Analytic==== |
|
24 |
+ |
|
25 |
+ |
|
26 |
+====3. Real World Education – Normal citizens in the US have little to no influence on policies implemented by the government.==== |
|
27 |
+Bullard, Ben. Author at Personal Liberty. August 13, 2014. "The Average American Has 'Essentially Zero' Influence Over U.S. Policy," Personal Liberty. http://personalliberty.com/average-american-essentially-zero-influence-u-s-policy/. |
|
28 |
+An academic look into the driving forces behind American Federal policymaking concludes that the average |
|
29 |
+AND |
|
30 |
+virtually no voice in shaping Federal policy compared with the "economic elites." |
|
31 |
+ |
|
32 |
+ |
|
33 |
+====4. Side Burdens - Oxford Dictionary defines negate as to "deny the existence of."==== |
|
34 |
+ |
|
35 |
+ |
|
36 |
+====5. Aff Ground –==== |
|
37 |
+ |
|
38 |
+ |
|
39 |
+====a. Analytic==== |
|
40 |
+ |
|
41 |
+ |
|
42 |
+====b. Analytic==== |
|
43 |
+ |
|
44 |
+ |
|
45 |
+====6. Neg Ground –==== |
|
46 |
+ |
|
47 |
+ |
|
48 |
+====a. Analytic==== |
|
49 |
+ |
|
50 |
+ |
|
51 |
+====b. Analytic==== |
|
52 |
+ |
|
53 |
+ |
|
54 |
+====Thus, a sufficient Neg burden is to prove a limitation on qualified immunity improbable in the status quo. I contend that a limitation on qualified immunity is not probable in the status quo. The trend is actually headed in the opposite direction – the Supreme Court is secretly expanding qi.==== |
|
55 |
+Kinports 16, Kit. Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Law. February 22, 2016. "The Supreme Court's Quiet Expansion of Qualified Immunity," Penn State Law Research Paper No. 6-2016. http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Kinports_PDF1.pdf. |
|
56 |
+In recent years, the Supreme Court opinions applying the qualified immunity defense have engaged |
|
57 |
+AND |
|
58 |
+government actors seeking immunity or the lower courts tasked with resolving their claims. |