Memorial Qin Aff
| Tournament | Round | Opponent | Judge | Cites | Round Report | Open Source | Edit/Delete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Longhorn Classic UT | 1 | Amanda Chen | Kevin Choi |
|
| ||
| Seven Lakes | 4 | Wyatt Hatfield |
|
| |||
| UH | 1 |
|
|
|
| Tournament | Round | Report |
|---|---|---|
| UH | 1 | Opponent: | Judge: AC- Education |
To modify or delete round reports, edit the associated round.
Cites
| Entry | Date |
|---|---|
JANFEB-AC-EducationTournament: UH | Round: 1 | Opponent: | Judge: The standard will be minimizing oppression through open debate and education. Oppression is the biggest impact in the round and morally excludes people, thus making it a prerequisite to morality because morality requires everybody to be factored in. Morality mandates expression of all voices, which necessarily prohibits structural oppression. Advantage 1: Education Yet what is the value of a university education without encountering, reflecting on and debating Important knowledge and beliefs gained by universities and colleges will be weak when tested in the real world w/o free speech. Corngold 16: Besides being protected by the First Amendment, the right of students and faculty to express Education is the best way to stop hate speech and oppression. By limiting free speech, my opponent destroys education. Ubangha 16: Education, both formal and informal, has been seen as a vital medium through which youths Education is better than regulation for a multitude of reasons. Ubangha card 2:
My opponent allows hate speech to thrive in the world outside of the college and university campuses, thus harming children and targets of hate speech, usually minorities. Ubangha 16: Victims of hate speech may usually suffer psychological harm, depression, social withdrawal, loss of self-esteem Advantage 2: Oppression Where racist, sexist and homophobic speech is concerned, the ACLU believes that more speech -- not less -- Allowing restrictions on speech just hands a tool to the government to decrease rights because speech is not always clearly defined. History proves that banning hate speech doesn’t reduce hate violence. For all these reasons, I affirm. I now stand open for CX. | 2/9/17 |
JANFEB-AC-Education v2Tournament: Seven Lakes | Round: 4 | Opponent: Wyatt Hatfield | Judge: I value morality. My standard is mitigating oppression. Material inequalities are based in moral exclusion, which is flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived difference. Morality mandates expression of all voices, which prohibits structural oppression. Weighing Analytic Majeed 9: Through the enactment and enforcement of speech codes aimed at offensive or uncivil speech, university Analytic B: Speech isn’t clearly defined. C: Speech codes harm minorities more than it helps them. Empirically proven by the University of Michigan. Speech codes also only address the symptom of a problem and drives biases underground where they can’t be addressed. ACLU 16: Historically, defamation laws or codes have proven ineffective at best and counter-productive at worst. C2: Education A: Free speech is a prereq to education. Zimmer 16: Yet what is the value of a university education without encountering, reflecting on and debating B: Education is the best way to stop hate speech and oppression. By limiting free speech, my opponent destroys education. Ubangha 16: Education, both formal and informal, has been seen as a vital medium through which youths Analytic Ubangha 2: Majeed 2: As discussed in the previous section, speech codes are often overbroad or vague or both. C4: Maintaining speech codes increases lawsuits against universities; harms education and hurts budgets. | 2/11/17 |
Open Source
| Filename | Date | Uploaded By | Delete |
|---|---|---|---|
12/3/16 | andrewqin02@gmailcom |
|