Tournament: Any | Round: 1 | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any
Hi, I'm Jake from sky view. You can email me at Bocajrelznuk@gmail.com, text me at (435)770-4431, or Facebook message me

Tournament: Sky View Round Robin | Round: 1 | Opponent: Sky View RW | Judge: Jody Orme

Rational entities must adhere to Constitutivism, or risk falling to infinite regression

Katsafanas Paul (Boston University) "Constitutivism about practical reasons" March 6th 2014 JW
Normative claims make demands on us: they tell us which actions to perform and
AND
not invoke external facts in order to legitimate their claim to authority.15

Obligations of institutions like a government must come from their constitutive aims—i.e. their inherent purpose. Otherwise, we can always ask why do we care, and never be able to generate normative obligations for the state.

Surgener writes: Kirk Surgener, Neo-Kantian Constitutivism and Metaethics. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/3298/1/Surgener12PhD.pdf 2011. DD
Constitutivism tries to ground the claims about agency Korsgaard uses in her argument for the
AND
system of distribution must embody to be a system of distribution at all.

For entities to achieve ends, constitutivity must be adhered to, as entities exist over time consistent action must be taken to achieve the stated ends. Variation from the intended purpose creates infinite regression.

Korsgaard 1 writes: Christine M. Korsgaard. "Personal Identity and the Unity of Agency: A Kantian Response to Parfit." In Personal Identity, ed. Raymond Martin and John Barresi. Blackwell: Malden, 2003.
The considerations I have adduced so far apply to unification at any given moment,
AND
clear content can be given to the idea of a merely present self.^

Free Speech is Key to Autonomy

Leanord, James. Jul  9 19:54:18 2016. Killing with Kindness: Speech Codes in the American University. Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org).DA=7/9/16.-SVJK)
Apart from any contribution to the advancement of truth, the attainment of knowledge,
AND
undergo a continuing process of introspection and evolution of their ideas and values.

Since independence is a necessary aim of each person, they need to rationally respect each other in order to ensure others respect their independence, too. Yet, in the state of nature, people have no independence because there's no central authority to regulate disputes over rights claims. The government is thus created as an arbiter of these rights claims.

Ripstein 2 writes:
The second problem ~with the state of nature~ concerns the enforcement of rights
AND
common) and powerful will, that can provide everyone this assurance."17

Since individuals can't have independence in the state of nature and a government that acts on behalf of all citizens is the only way to secure this freedom, they have an obligation to form the state. The constitutive aim of the government is thus to act as the collective will of the people by securing rights claims.

Ripstein 3 writes:
These difficulties for innate right in the state of nature—indeterminacy, lack of
AND
on behalf of everyone~.~, and authorizing both enforcement and adjudication under law.

Only restrictions predicated on independence create limitations that are fair, since they are equally restrictive to all parties.

Ripstein ~Arthur Ripstein, Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy, 2009~
Independence is the basic principle of right. It guarantees equal freedom, and so requires that no person be subject to the choice of another. The idea of independence is similar to one that has been the target of many objections. The basic form of almost all of these focuses on the fact that any set of rules prohibits some acts that people would otherwise do, so that, for example, laws prohibiting personal injury and property damage put limits on the ability of people to
do as they wish.  Because different people have incompatible wants, to let one
AND
entitlement to accept or decline your invitations is simply their right to independence.

View the framework debate as a question of which ethical theory is better justified, rather than whether one is absolutely true. This is a better philosophical methodology.

Ross writes: Jacob Ross. Rejecting Ethical Deflationism. Ethics. 2006. DD
Before considering the question of what ethical theories are worthy of acceptance and what ethical
AND
the problem of theory acceptance, both in ethics and in other domains.

Free Speech is Key to Autonomy

Leanord 1, James. Jul  9 19:54:18 2016. Killing with Kindness: Speech Codes in the American University. Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org).DA=7/9/16.-SVJK)
Apart from any contribution to the advancement of truth, the attainment of knowledge,
AND
undergo a continuing process of introspection and evolution of their ideas and values.

Restricting free speech opens up the playing field to majority override autonomy abuses. Utilitarian balancing doesn't justify the denial of first amendment rights.

Baker, Edwin C.1989.Human Liberty and Freedom of Speech.Book. Copyright © 1989 by Oxford University Press, Inc.DA=7/14/16.-SVJK)
Historically, not all societies have exhibited the view that these premises of respect for
AND
~s~ why utilitarian balancing does not justify limiting first amendment rights.

Resentment of Speech Codes Kills Potential Solvency

Leanord 2, James. Jul  9 19:54:18 2016. Killing with Kindness: Speech Codes in the American University. Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org).DA=7/9/16.-SVJK)
In fact, the effect of the codes will probably be negative. The one
AND
sense of equality will emerge from an atmosphere of resentment against university paternalism.

Speech Codes Only Transform Hate Speech into Something Worse

Leanord 3 James. Jul  9 19:54:18 2016. Killing with Kindness: Speech Codes in the American University. Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org).DA=7/9/16.-SVJK)
Perhaps the most insidious effect of thought restrictions is the removal of offensive thought from
AND
ugliness of a thought is a reason to expose rather than hide it.

Long term impact of speech codes is racial violence

Leanord 4, James. Jul  9 19:54:18 2016. Killing with Kindness: Speech Codes in the American University. Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org).DA=7/9/16.-SVJK)
In the long term, resentment over thought control will probably harden~s~
AND
campus that emphasizes differences over shared values is hardly promising and probably doomed.

The Aff Doesn't Exacerbate Hate Speech

Leanord 5, James. "Killing with Kindness: Speech Codes in the American University." Ohio Northern University Law Review, 1993
An additional point should be made at the risk of stating the obvious. The
AND
or "long live civility,!" the principle of free expression is preserved.

Tournament: Copper Classic | Round: 2 | Opponent: Copper Hills LM | Judge: Keyes, Tammy

We determine what is moral through conversational interaction, frameworks must first seek to preserve the possibility of interaction before assuming any other moral statements

Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy. Springer Science and Business Media, Mar 14, 2013.
First, it should be noted that such a position assumes that at least the
AND
as valid insofar as he is able to make his proposal at all.

This human interaction requires tolerance

Tinder, Glenn. "In Defense of Pure Tolerance." Polity, vol. 6, no. 4, 1974, pp. 446–468. www.jstor.org/stable/3234026.
(3) Tolerance is so crucial to human relations that the risks it involves must be run. To develop this point I must call on the theory suggested in the first part of this essay-the idea that tolerance is the "primal setting at a distance" without which communication cannot occur. Tolerance, according to this view, is an opportunity for communication. How does this apply to the problem of the tension between tolerance and other values? Briefly, it implies that tolerance creates the possibility that whatever value is sought will become a subject of communication. For the sake of convenience I shall say that what tolerance does, in relation to every value to which it applies, is to establish~es~ a "margin of communality." It creates a possibility that the value will be attacked and defeated, but at the same time it creates a counter-possibility: that ~the value~ it will become a subject of common inquiry and understanding
I thus Value Communal Morality 

Community requires the recasting of tolerance and morality from individual to  communal perspectives, failure to do so risks harmful imaginative communal ideals

Tinder, Glenn. "In Defense of Pure Tolerance." Polity, vol. 6, no. 4, 1974, pp. 446–468. www.jstor.org/stable/3234026.
Along these lines, it seems to me that tolerance can be recast as a
AND
avoided had communal man always, before all else, taken this first step

As societies develop, diversity is inevitable, further emphasizing a need for tolerant citizens

Stangl  Chapters seven and eight, finally, turn from the issue of toleration as a personal virtue to the related question of political toleration. In chapter seven, Fiala focuses on Mill's epistemological argument for tolerance, but seems to reject it in unrevised form. Agreeing with Waldron, and against Mill, Fiala worries that the argument depends upon the false assumption that belief cannot be coerced. What Mill should have said, Fiala claims, is not that it is impossible to coerce belief, but that we ought not to ~coerce belief~. A purely political argument for tolerance, however, can be found in pragmatic considerations. Thus, in chapter eight, Fiala draws on the work of Rawls to argue that tolerance can be justified merely on the pragmatic grounds that diversity in our views of the good is simply inevitable. If we are to avoid the horrors of sectarian wars and coercive state practices, then tolerance is, if nothing else, a practical necessity.
Thus the standard is respecting communal tolerance.

First, Public colleges and universities in America should represent a marketplace of ideas

Trama  11
Former United States Supreme Court Justice William Brennan Jr. once referred to America as
AND
strengthen the marketplace of ideas~.~ by allowing as much competition as possible. 

The marketplace of ideas works, the status quo proves

Rosenbloom  11
Some college administrators seem to incorrectly believe that the only way to develop a "
AND
"green light" rating from FIRE for protecting speech rights on campus.

Students need the ability to tolerate hate speech, and respond with constructive argumentation

Stone 16
First, there is the widespread tendency of students on college campuses these days to
AND
run undermine the very foundations of higher education and of democratic decision making.

Blatantly harmful speech, such as racial slurs, can be solved through counter speech- this is empirically proven.

Davidson  16
All experts agreed that negative speech creates awareness that surrounds a certain topic. They all noted that "good speech" surfaces to combat the "bad speech." Humphrey notes that, "We have seen a lot of students stand up and say that this isn't welcome in this community. It galvanized a movement that said we need to do better" (Appendix A). Den Otter notes something very similar, stating that, "I think any time that there's some kind  51 of racist incident on campus, people start talking about it. They're made more aware of it" (Appendix B). And Loving advocates for people to not just stand idly while hate speech is taking place around them, that, "If racial slurs were met with more conversation, evil councils being remedied by good councils, then how long would that atmosphere remain on campus?" (Appendix C).  The research shows that these suggestions and statements are true, if history is used as an indicator. Various incidents that have occurred, such as the California Polytechnic State University College Republicans Free Speech Wall, the Crops House Incident and the Charlie Hebdo Attacks have created movements against the negative speech that took place. Many times when "bad speech" shows its face, there are people who use "good speech" to combat the issue.
This allows for students to A) become more tolerant of others and B) allow for civil discourse that proves most important to a tolerant college campus

Free speech increases tolerance.

Gordon 2
All ideas must be allowed to be expressed freely in order to serve ~the
AND
them, defending them, understanding their justifications, and demonstrating their superiority. 

Censorship of student journalism is increasing at the worst possible time. Censorship discourages questioning the government. Schuman 12-8

(Rebecca, http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2016/12/student_journalists_are_under_threat.html)
Well, here's some great news to cheer you up: The American student press
AND
an entire generation of fledgling journalists who've come up thinking censorship is acceptable.

The legal justification for newspaper censorship is a 7th circuit decision that applied Hazelwood to universities-this allows unchecked arbitrary censorship by administrators. Goodman 05

( S. Mark Goodman, Michael C. Hiestand, Student Press Law Center 2005 WL 2736314 (U.S.) (Appellate Petition, Motion and Filing) Supreme Court of the United States. Margaret L. HOSTY, Jeni S. Porche, and Steven P. Barba, Petitioners, v. Patricia CARTER, Respondent. No. 05-377. October 20, 2005. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Brief of Amici Curiae Student Press Law Center, Associated Collegiate Press, College Media Advisers, Community College Journalism Association, Society for Collegiate Journalists, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, American Society of Newspaper Editors, National Newspaper Association, Newspaper Association of America, Society of Professional Journalists, Associated Press Managing Editors, College Newspaper Business and Advertising Managers, National Federation of Press Women, National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and the Independent Press Association/Campus Journalism Project in Support of Petition of Margaret L. Hosty, Jeni S. Porche, and Steven P. Barba for Writ of Certiorari Of Counsel: S. Mark Goodman, Michael C. Hiestand, Student Press Law Center, 1101 Wilson Blvd., Ste 1100, Arlington, VA 22209-2211, (703) 807-1904. Richard M. Goehler, (Counsel of Record), Frost Brown Todd LLC, 2200 PNC Center, 201 East Fifth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, (513) 651-6800, Counsel for Amici Curiae.)
In contrast to many high school censorship incidents, public college administrators today are less
AND
censorship of college and university student newspapers to be the legacy of Hazelwood.

Regulation of newspapers is a crucial precedent used to justify widespread campus censorship-it uniquely empowers and protects administrators to censor.

Lukianoff 05
(George, Samantha Harris, Foundation for Individual, Rights in Education, 2005 WL 2736313 (U.S.) (Appellate Petition, Motion and Filing) Supreme Court of the United States. Margaret L. HOSTY et al., Petitioners, v. Patricia CARTER, Respondent. No. 05-377. October 19, 2005. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Brief Amici Curiae of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education; The Coalition for Student and Academic Rights; Feminists for Free Expression; The First Amendment Project; Ifeminists.Net; National Association of Scholars; Accuracy in Academia; Leadership Institute; The Individual Rights Foundation; The American Council of Trustees and Alumni; and Students for Academic Freedom in Support of Petitioners)
Commentators from across the political spectrum, while often disagreeing on the source, the
AND
in freedom, and will not even know when it is lost."20