Tournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Brentwood RY | Judge: Kris Kaya

Counterplan: north korea should increase its desal plants

Viable in poorer and water-stressed areas—SMRs key

IAEA 7
"Economics of Nuclear Desalination: New Developments and Site Specific Studies", July, http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1561_web.pdf
 With technical co-ordination or support of the IAEA, several demonstration programs
AND
appropriate for remote areas that are not suitable for connections to the grid.

Massive global water shortages are coming now—population growth, climate change, higher standard of living

Specter 15
~Michael Specter—staff writer at The New Yorker since 1998, and has written frequently about AIDS, T.B., and malaria in the developing world, as well as about agricultural biotechnology, avian influenza, the world's diminishing freshwater resources, and synthetic biology; "A Thirsty, Violent World," Feb 24 2015, New Yorkr~ dz
Dozens of other countries face similar situations—not someday, or soon, but
AND
going to be profound changes in the water cycle due to climate change."

Only desalination can meet growing water shortages

Orts 13
~Eric Orts, Faculty Director, Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership; "The Nexus of Food, Energy, and Water," Jun 2013, Wharton~dz
Once we exhaust the world's supply of fresh water, there isn't any more.
AND
a Year as World Water Dries Up," declared a recent Bloomberg headline.

Only nuclear power provides sufficient energy for desalination

IAEA 15 ~— widely known as the world's "Atoms for Peace" organization within the United Nations family. Set up in 1957 as the world's centre for cooperation in the nuclear field, the Agency works with its Member dz
AND
for coupling nuclear reactors and desalination systems for specific sites in the Mediterranean region

The impact is accelerating water crises—escalate and cause extinction

Gallagher 15
~Brian Gallagher—assistant research editor at Nautilus; "Why A Post-Nuclear World Would Look Nothing Like "Mad Max"," Nautilus, Jun 27 2015~ dz
Mad Max: Fury Road envisions an embarrassing, nightmarish future. Worldwide droughts have
AND
, there would no longer be billions of people drinking the world dry.

Tournament: Loyola | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Servite PA | Judge: Panel

1NC

Morality must be agent-neutral to explain the universality of moral claims—but moral clsims must appeal to subjective features of moral agents to explain their normativity

Lerm 1 summarizes
~Lerm, Jessica. "Second-personal reasons: why we need something like them, but why there are actually no such things," South African Journal of Philosophy31.2 (2012): 328-339.~ Note: the author disagrees with the conclusion of the NC.
Agent-neutral reasons are to be distinguished from agent-relative reasons,2
AND
possible solutions to the puzzle: Hobbes', and the neo-Kantians'. 

Impacts:

A). takes out agent-neutral theories like util—they assume some moral good to be maximized, but the good only exists for a particular agent

B). authority and universality are a side constraint to any ethical theory—or else they can't generate normative obligations for state action since states won't follow them

That implies that the giving up of absolute authority to the state—only Hobbesian contract theory generates normative universal reasons for state action

Lerm 2 summarizes
~Lerm, Jessica. "Second-personal reasons: why we need something like them, but why there are actually no such things," South African Journal of Philosophy31.2 (2012): 328-339.~ Note: the author disagrees with the conclusion of the NC.
The Hobbesian proposal Thomas Hobbes offers a solution to this puzzle of moral reasons.
AND
reasons the "basic recipe" to account for both features of morality.

Impacts:

A). precedes the aff framework—absolute sovereignty is a side constraint since state-based theories presume the existence of sovereignty of the state to do anything to begin with

B). a prerequisite to any moral action—no morality exists in the state of nature since we're all bound by carnal desires until the Sovereign can come along to unify subjective viewpoints and speak collectively for all of us

C). no matter how good the aff is, it's infinitely worse than the state of nature since there's nothing to enforce contracts or correct any injustices people have towards one another—justifies infinite racism and oppression

D). prohibitions on actions by the sovereign are a logical impossibility since the sovereign by definition have absolute authority on any action

Thus, the standard is consistency with the will of the Sovereign.

Additional reasons to prefer:

A). Actor and topic specificity—Dictionary.com defines ought as obligation or duty, so the resolution appeals to unique moral positions of the state, which are distinct from individuals

~Dictionary.com, "ought," first definition. Random House, 2015~

B). Countries are states, which are defined by their sovereignty

Grimsley no date
~a recovering lawyer who now happily fills his days writing, teaching and spending time with his wife, kids, and dog. He resides in Rochester, Minnesota, where he is finishing the second book in the Prometheus Saga among other writing projects; "The Difference Between Countries, Nations, States, and Governments," Study.com, Shawn Grimsley~
If you've ever looked at globes and maps, you've probably seen quite a few
AND
as either a 'country' or a 'State.' People use the terms interchangeably

Offense—

1). Prohibition on nuclear power unilaterally restricts the Sovereign's ability to enact certain energy policies, but the Sovereign must maintain absolute authority—nuclear power is inevitably part of government policies

NEA 04
~Nuclear Energy Agency, "Nuclear energy: the role of government," 2004 Vol 22 Num 1~
Governments have been deeply involved in the development of nuclear energy. Some of them
AND
action and nuclear energy was a highly visible symbol of their successful application.

2). Nuclear energy consolidates state power: A). it increases government control over energy policy and the economy—nuclear power plants are huge endeavors requiring immense amount of government subsidies and capital investments instead of small-scale enterprises B). keeping "all of above" options available increases government independence by increasing flexibility—even if nuclear power isn't currently needed, keeping the possibility open ensures governments can move away from dependence on foreign fossil fuels in the future when conflict breaks out

AC

Permissibility negates:

1) Ought implies a moral obligation according to the AC. Obligations are disproven when the action is permissible or prohibited since it can't also be obligatory.  So, permissibility is sufficient condition to negate.

2) The converse of an "ought' statement isn't an ought not statement, but rather a middle ground of lack of an obligation. Conflicting moral obligations, like "we ought to" do some action and "we ought not to" do that same action, cannot both be true by definition. However, they can both be false, so permissibility is neg ground.

3). We don't presume things are morally permissible until we know they don't cause harm—if you say "I want to kill a baby tomorrow," I don't just presume that to be permissible.  In the case of forced-case scenarios, we instead want to suspend judgment because our choice is irreversible if we presume wrong.

Presumption negates:

1). Affirming is positive action while negating is doing nothing—doing something has a risk of making things worse

2). Every positive statement carries infinite assumptions as its basis. For a conclusion to be true, all premises must follow; since it's more likely that one assumption can be refuted than for all premises to be true, we ought to reject the statement.

Prefer substantive reasons to presume—there's still offense left

Off

Interpretation—if the neg has previously request that the neg not run God framework at another tournament, the aff must ask the competitiors before running theistic argumens

ONE Judge impartiality: Religious arguments are uniquely abusive since literally every judge will have a bias one way or the other, as they all have some view on religion. Judges are less likely to vote on arguments that conflict with their important personal beliefs, so one side always has a bias.

Empirics prove –  arguments appealing to religion trade off with rational evaluation of arguments. This effect is so widespread that some courts have even banned religious appeals

Miller and Bornstein 6 (Monica Miller University of Nevada, Reno; Brian H. Bornstein, University of Nebraska-Lincoln)"The Use of Religion in Death Penalty Sentencing Trials" University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, Department of Psychology
Attorneys who use religious appeals and testimony believe they will be influential, and much
AND
appeal and the strength of the evidence more aggravators vs. more mitigators).

TWO you force debaters who believe in God to contradict their most deeply held beliefs.

THREE turn ground-what the Bible says is unturnable.

Off

Biblical Christianity justifies racism and slavery

Giberson, Religion PHD, 15
Karl Giberson, Ph.D, Professor of Science and Religion, Stonehill College 6-24-2015, "The Biblical Roots of Racism," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karl-giberson-phd/the-biblical-roots-of-racism_b_7649390.html
The tragic shooting in South Carolina offers another painful reminder of American Christianity's troubled relationship
AND
will be struggling with its mixed messages about the meaning of the races.

This is an independent voting issue-racism must be rejected in every cases

Memmi 2k (Albert, Professor Emeritus of Sociology @ University Of Paris; RACISM, translated by Steve Martinot, pp.163)

The struggle against racism will be long, difficult, without intermission, without
AND
. True, it is a wager, but the stakes are irresistible.

You cannot separate the debaters from the discourse-this is an independent voting issue

Vincent 13
Chris Vincent, Re-Conceptualizing our Performances: Accountability in Lincoln Douglas Debate, Vbriefly, 2013.  NS
The question then becomes how does our discourse justify what we believe? For many
AND
color, and in turn destroy the transformative potential this community could have.

Tournament: Loyola | Round: 5 | Opponent: Del Mar FK | Judge: Scott Wheeler

their speech act undermines vital military strategy

EYAGO 05 Political Commentary – Sound Politics Reporter ~7/8, http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/004721.html, Sound Commentary on Current Events in Seattle, Puget Sound and Washington State~
Finally, I am angry at those who undermine our efforts to conduct this war
AND
our public leaders. What they do for political gain is completely unconscionable.

Heg solves several scenarios for war and extinction

Bradley A. Thayer, November/December, 2006 "In Defense of Primacy," NATIONAL INTEREST Issue 86
THROUGHOUT HISTORY, peace and stability have been great benefits of an era where there
AND
, for the United States humanitarian missions are the equivalent of a blitzkrieg.

Vote neg to align ourselves with hegemony – the academic sphere of debate is key

Mearsheimer 1995 Professor of Political Science and the co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago. West Point graduate, retired Air Force officer (John, Professor Political Science at the University of Chicago, International Security, Summer, p. 93)
The discussion of institutions up to now has a distinct academic flavor. However,
AND
-causing effects of institutions until they have solid evidence to support their positions

Tournament: Loyola | Round: 3 | Opponent: Brentwood RY | Judge: Kris Kaya

Securitization of North Korean war turns case – ethical obligation to reject it

Bleiker 5 – Professor of International Relations at the University of Queensland (Roland, "Professor of International Relations at the University of Queensland," University of Minnesota Press, google books, x-xi)
The dangers of North Korea's nuclear brinkmanship are evident and much discussed. Miscalculation or
AND
with new and more sensitive attempts to address the dilemmas of Korean security. 

North Korean threat is socially constructed and racist —- motivates imperial aggression and conflict

Lal 09 (Prerna, JD – George Washington University and MA in International Relations – San Franscisco State University, "North Korea Is Not a Threat – Unveiling Hegemonic Discourses", 4-5, http://prernalal.com/2009/04/ north-korea-is-not-a-threat-unveiling-hegemonic-discourses/)
That security is socially constructed does not mean that there are not to be found
AND
be an entity sometime in the near future and become into Korea again. 

Representations of North Korea are rooted in ideological hegemony not objective data

David Shim, Phd Candidate @ GIGA Institute of Asian Studies, 08 ~Paper prepared for presentation at the 2008 ISA, Production, Hegemonization and Contestation of Discursive Hegemony: The Case of the Six-Party Talks in Northeast Asia, www.allacademic.com/meta/p253290_index.html~
Laclau and Mouffe's (2001: chapter 2) concept of hegemony, which is
AND
practices of problematizing North Korea took place even before an action was done. 

Their representations are a product of imperialism and media bias

Alexandra Homolar-Riechmann, @ Peace Research Institute Frankfurt and Kings College, 09 ~Prepared for delivery at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, "Rebels without a cause: US foreign policy and the concept of rogue states," p. allacademic~
The 1993-94 North Korean nuclear crisis had a profound impact on the development
AND
, politics, and policies (cf. Bleiker 2003; Smith 2000). 

Cold War conceptions of Asia aren't true anymore – disproving the myth of an apocalyptic North Korea is key

Kang 03. David (Professor of International Relations and Business, Director of Korean Studies Institute), Getting Asia Wrong: The Need for New Analytical Frameworks International Security, Volume 27, Number 4, Spring 2003, pp. 57-85 MUSE
Following the end of the Cold War in 1991, some scholars in the West
AND
" response is mere rhetorical wordplay designed to avoid trou-  bling evidence.    

Threat discourse distracts from mass structural violence — that outweighs

Jackson 12—Director of the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, the University of Otago. Former. Professor of International Politics at Aberystwyth University (8/5/12, Richard, The Great Con of National Security, http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/the-great-con-of-national-security/)
It may have once been the case that being attacked by another country was a
AND
terrorism. Somehow, we need to challenge the politicians on this fact.

Teaching fear is the infusion point of militarism – justifies perpetual war, colonialism, and academic racism – rejection destabilizes the foundations of interventionism – a-priori issue of your ballot

Nguyen 14 ~Nicole, Department of Cultural Foundations of Education at Syracuse University, January 21, "Education as Warfare?: Mapping Securitised Education Interventions as War on Terror Strategy," Vol. 1 No. 1, pg. 20-6~
Since September 11, the US has renewed its focus on domestic education as a
AND
critical thinking for democratic participation to training young people for the war on terror