Tournament: Blake | Round: 2 | Opponent: American Heritage DM | Judge: Wesley Hu
Korsgard, Christine. “Creating the kingdom of ends: reciprocity and responsibility in personal relations.” Philosophical Perspectives, vol. 6, 1992, pp. 305-332.

Gauthier, David (Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh). Morals by Agreement. (1986).

Kairys, David. The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique. ReadHowYouWant.com, November 2010.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Bishop v. Aronov, 926 F.2d 1066, 1991. Ellipses in original.

Russo, Charles. Handbook of Comparative Higher Education Law, RandL Education, 2013.

Tournament: ho yip | Round: Triples | Opponent: mr moat | Judge: society
Heinz had done it. He had created the Genderswap-inator. It took quite a while to make without having any disruptions by Perry And now he would finally blast it... He aimed it towards his chosen target; he didn't realize Roger was standing in front of a wall of mirrors. He fired the laser...and missed. It hit the mirror. Heinz stepped back, tripped, and fell down a flight of stairs, slowly becoming more and more unconscious with each step he descended. Phineas, Ferb and Isabella were planning the day's activity, when the laser from the inator hit Phineas and Isabella. "What was that?" Phineas asked, noticing a sudden change in his voice. His assumptions were correct. "Phineas, why do you have my voice?" Isabella asked, in Phineas' voice. They looked at each other in fear, and screamed. They screamed in horror; maybe because there was a possibility that they could never change because of the results; but most importantly, maybe some secrets would be revealed. Phineas looked over at Ferb, who was covering his mouth in shock. "Oh, my, lord..." he managed to get out. "Don't worry! We'll get through this!" 'Phineas' exclaimed. "Right, Isabella?" "Uhh...sure...right?" 'Isabella' faked a smile. "Let's get to work on the Gender Switcheroo 9001!" he exclaimed. Isabella knew this would bring them closer together, them being Phineas and her. Maybe a like-like relationship could start Heinz got up, and looked at his surroundings. Amidst his cackling, he had fallen down the stairs. Quickly, he ran back up. To his surprise, the Genderswap-inator was still standing, and fully functional; so he decided to use it again. He wondered who he would hit. He hoped it would be a happy couple. He closed his eyes, pointed the inator in a random direction, and fired. "AHHHH!" came two screams, one feminine and the other masculine. "Perfect." he thought, as he embraced the evil within. Those two screams had come from none other than Candace and Jeremy, now dubbed Danville's happiest and longest-lasting couple. "What the heck!" they both thought, dazed and angry. "PHINEAS!" Candace screamed. "PHINEAS!" The boy in question heard the scream and whipped around. Candace rushed through the gate, Jeremy running to catch up with her. "Yes, Canda-" he stopped, "Candace?" "That's my name, twerp!" she replied, not looking at him. "What happened?" he asked, a worried expression visible on his face. She cast a glance at him, "Oh, you know full well what happe-What happened?" "Isabella and I were genderswapped as well..." he trailed off. "You got hit with your own invention; ha!" "It wasn't us!" Isabella defended. Ferb nodded, confirming, 'Wasn't us.' "Well then, who was it?" Perry entered the backyard, his head down. "Oh, there you are, Perry!" Ferb mumbled. Perry looked up. Suddenly, his eyes widened; he scurried away as quickly as possible. "Hey, Ferb, Perry showed emotion!" Phineas exclaimed. "I know." he replied. "And second line of the day, bro! Congrats!" Ferb gave thumbs up. "I have a feeling Perry's involved in this..." Candace mused. "Don't be silly, Candace! He's just a platypus; they don't do much." Phineas pointed out. "But you just saw him surprised and worried!" "Your point?" Phineas raised his eyebrow. "He's up to something!" "Phineas," Jeremy interrupted, "I hate to rain on your parade, Phineas, but I think Candace is right. Perry was acting a little suspicious." Phineas perked up a little, "All right, then! Let's go check it out!" Phineas and Isabella spotted teal hairs Perry had shed. They ran out the gate, leaving Ferb, Jeremy, and, obviously, Candace, by themselves. "Why does no one listen to me?" she demanded, expecting an answer. "Because you're crazy?" Ferb responded. "Oh, shut up!" She smacked him upside the head. "I'll give a proper answer, here." Jeremy obliged, "It's what makes you you, Candace!" "Aww...thanks, Jeremy!" The two walked off, leaving Ferb standing by the tree. "Well, I was right; that's for sure!" He ran off to catch up with the others.
This story is a metaphor for adapting literary works in which characteristics of the original characters are switched.
CP- Actors should not align with gender because genderswapping is empowering.
Mapplethorpe:
 At heart, genderswap fan fiction stories explore the cultural constructedness of gender, and interrogate what theorist Judith Butler describes as gender performativity and the role that physical embodiment plays in gender identity (note 7). Individuals perform gender identity through various behaviors ranging from clothing choices (women's skirts, high heels, and tight-fitting clothing; men's loose clothing, low-heeled shoes, and hats), to how they move their bodies, use their voices, and the activities they participate in. Culturally, we expect male-bodied persons to behave (i.e., perform) in masculine-gendered ways (ambitious, protective, aggressive, assertive), and we expect female-bodied individuals to behave in feminine-gendered ways (nurturing, weak, passive, submissive). Such alignment is often referred to as cisgender—literally, gendered behavior that is on the side of its assigned biological sex (note 8). Gender theorists emphasize that such behaviors are learned at an early age by watching and mirroring people we admire, and while it may be easy to criticize such descriptions as stereotypes, they describe how most people define and police gender in their everyday lives. Children, parents, teachers, and friends all conspire to correct any behaviors that do not seem to match a person's perceived sex.
http://nicocarpentier.net/koccc/Publications/Paper_Sofie_Birmingham.html
Mapplethorpe2:
So far we have seen that in academic discourse gender bending is considered an act of playing with gender roles, of breaking through the gender boundaries and questioning hegemonic gender discourse. A few scholars have point out that especially transvestism reproduces the fixed masculinity and femininity. A paradigm shift has taken place. Bending gender is a subversive practice stemming from the avant-garde entering popular culture. Gender benders raise questions about the dominant gender discourse and blur the boundaries of gender. Using theories of Judith Butler, gender bending is seen as an act of resistance. Applauding the resistance of the gender benders, it seems that academics have forgotten the different meanings and polysemic readings of text. These fragmented and contradictory readings seem to disappear by the desire to break gender boundaries. Gender benders are seen as agents of resistance who producing meaning and are read as discursive practices of power. The power referred to here is that which breaks the hegemonic discourse on masculinity and femininity. At least that is what these scholars hope for. The desired result is an effect of empowering the ‘others’.
http://nicocarpentier.net/koccc/Publications/Paper_Sofie_Birmingham.html
Aprioris
filmmakers don’t have a say in the cast, a casting panel does so the action is not capable by the agent so it’s impossible to assign a moral obligation.
adaptation is defined as the changes made by living systems in response to their environment - Means auto negate if racism is real because whitewashing is a logical consequence of racism.
 We don’t know the race of some characters if it is never specified in the book, means it is impossible so autonegate.
Adaptations of literary work can include things not movies for example a spin off series so film makers would have no say in it. Therefore autonegate.
Actors refers to male. This means you autonegate because to only cast actors would mean that female characters in movie must not align with their gender.
Adaptation is defined as the regulating by the pupil of the quantity of lightentering the eye. The resolution is nonsense so negate since the aff has burden to prove the resolution true.
Framing
The aff must defend all instances. Otherwise they get to pick and choose instances. If that was the case then the neg would have to defend that in all instances filmmakers should cast in ways that gender and ethnicities do not align. This would mean casting a white nelson Mandela in his movie which is an unfair neg burden. This means counterplans are legitimate.
CP – Characters should not align with gender and race because they can be replaced by CGI
Everett:
Virtual characters in films are nothing new. The first - a computer-generated knight - appeared in The Young Sherlock in 1985, and since then we've seen everything from artificial extras in Titanic to detailed motion-capture characters such as Gollum in The Lord of the Rings. And while some virtual human faces still creep us out (Polar Express, anyone?), a few have graced our screens without us even realising. Brad Pitt's reverse-ageing process in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, for example, was created not with prosthetics but with computer-generated imagery (CGI). "Very few people watching that film even knew that CGI was going on," says Darren Hendler, digital effects supervisor at Digital Domain. "We are at the point where we can create a digital version of an actor that is indistinguishable from the real person." There are plenty of reasons to welcome the technology. Eventually, it could democratise movies, allowing anybody to make a film using a cast they have created. There are also financial advantages, says Professor Nadia Magnenat Thalmann, who has pioneered research into virtual humans for the past 30 years. "On some films it costs a fortune to hire real actors," she says. "We're able to make virtual actors look great - and as soon as we can automate the process, there will be a cost-benefit analysis. If it's cheaper, second-rank actors will be done more and more by computer." According to Hendler, some actors are already embracing the process and having themselves scanned. "If they're in a movie later on where they need to be younger, they already have that snapshot," he says. "They are starting to archive their digital selves." But they're also wary. Tom Cruise, who was scanned for his role in Oblivion, had his data hand-delivered to his house and all other copies destroyed. "The more experienced actors will start to have more control over their contracts with the studios; more say over how their final digital likeness looks and how it is used," says Hendler. But if Folman's vision becomes a reality, films might even be cast using digital versions of actors who have long since died. It is already possible to create fairly convincing virtual versions of actors who were never scanned, using old footage and performance doubles. And, a CG version of Paul Walker has been created to complete Fast and Furious 7, after the actor died part-way through filming. There are also developments that could make real actors, even in their digital forms, completely redundant. "The big trend is to make virtual humans conscious of their environment and intelligent," says Magnenat Thalmann. If successful, film-makers will one day be able to create virtual actors who respond to their direction autonomously.
1- Allows for better movies, which aligns with the goal of casting so it means there is a contractual obligation to negate
2- CGI movies are awesome. Transformers  was dope.

CP- cast actors that don’t align with gender for characters that are robots, animals, or otherwise genderless
1)R2D2 was played by an actor, means in the aff world we have no star wars
2) Nobody is the same race as animals from the Ling King so in the aff world we don’t have that movie either

CP solves because we can cast people to portray those characters even though their race doesn’t align
CP-  Hamilton, TJ loves this movie
Lin Manuel Miranda is Ethnicity: Puerto Rican, as well as small amounts of Mexican, African-American, and English
Compared to Alexander HamiltonEthnicity:
*Scottish (father)
*English, more distant French Huguenot

Tournament: Blake | Round: 5 | Opponent: American Heritage DM | Judge: Wesley Hu
Humbach, John A. "The Constitution and Revenge Porn." Pace Law Review 35.1 (2015).

Filipovic, Jill. "'Revenge Porn' Is about Degrading Women Sexually and Professionally." The Guardian, 28 Jan. 2013. Web.

Murray, Christine and Allison Crowe. “‘Revenge porn as a form of intimate partner violence.” See the Triumph, April 6, 2014. Web.

Tournament: lmao | Round: Finals | Opponent: gsfjg | Judge: lksdjf
5157779626
https://www.facebook.com/evan.mckinney.737
evmckinney9@gmail.com

Tournament: valley | Round: 2 | Opponent: trent probably | Judge: tj folei
The harm of not believing in God and following his will always outweighs the aff. Even without prove that God exists, we should still default to believing in God because of Pascal’s wager. This says that we get more benefit from believing in God than we get from not. If we believe in God but God doesn’t exist there is no harm, but if God does exist we get eternal joy. If we don’t believe in God and he doesn’t exist there is no harm, but if he does exist then we get eternal Hell. So, if we believe in God the worst possible outcome is nothing, but the best possible outcome is Heaven. If we don’t believe in God the worst possible outcome is Hell, but the best possible outcome is nothing. The benefits of believing in God far outweigh the harms of not believing.
And, GMOs are from Satan.  Melbourne preaches:
Both the GM concept and GM products are evil, and condemned by God's Word. Even the godless British media can perceive that GM organisms (GMO) are demonic. They have wisely labelled them "Frankenstein foods", after Mary Shelley's monstrous literary invention that ultimately destroyed its creator Baron Frankenstein. Nobody wants GMO products in Europe, despite New World Order companies like DuPont and Monsanto trying to force them on farmers and consumers using all kinds of propaganda, pressure, false claims, and subterfuge. However, you ask are they empirically wrong in God's sight, and the Bible gives a clear answer: Yes! Genesis chapter one describes God creating seed and fruit-bearing plants, shrubs, and trees, each one having the perfect seed within to continue reproducing itself indefinitely. He called them "kinds", science calls them "species". (Keep in mind that though the terms are analogous they are not synonymous. For the purpose of this discussion, we may take the word "kind" as approximating to "species", though it is actually broader than a single species.) He did the same with animals, including domestic livestock. Each kind, or species, duplicating itself down the generations, even through the intense corruption caused by The Fall. After The Fall of Man the LORD introduced the Law to remind us of our inherent sinfulness and need for the Savior. Aspects of the Levitical Law governed the preservation of the kinds He had determined. So we see instructions such as Lev. 19:19 KJV; Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee. Gender here means mate with. The clear point is to keep the kinds pure, distinct, and not to cross them. This is echoed in other scriptures such as Deut. 22:9 KJV; Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. God wants the species (kinds) to be maintained, trying to cross them defiles them. The principle of improvement of a "kind" by selective breeding of a particular species, such as barley or sheep, does not corrupt the species barrier, and so is biblically acceptable. Genetic modification of species directly contradicts God's word by taking genes from one kind (species) and mingling them with another kind (species). It is sin. The progeny of such attempted crosses are usually self-aborted, born dead, or are sterile. This is part of God's inbuilt protective mechanism to preserve the kinds. But wicked men have devised ways to circumvent such divine blocks, and they are producing all sorts of inter-species crosses. They tout their new species as "improvements", make grand false claims, ignore the fact that God has condemned them, and they will perish under the curse. Both the word of God and the Spirit of God in believer's hearts unequivocally condemn genetically modified organisms. Therefore, resolve today to have nothing to do with the sin of genetic modification, avoid all GM products, and denounce those guilty of defying God, who thereby bring a curse on their families and nations.  
Melbourne, Colin. "GM Food Crops and the Bible." Born Again Christian Info. The Will of God, n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
Biotechnology is tampering with the divine will of God.
Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.
God. “Bible”.
We ought to publicly shame scientists and never consume GMOs unless we wish to rot in h-e-double hockey sticks.
Butterfly DA
Butterflies are important Bwindi Researchers:
Butterflies are categorized as keystone species, which enable many smaller species of insects to thrive and reproduce in an ecosystem. In simple terms, it denotes that conservation of butterflies also conserves other species of insects. In fact, the basic health of our ecosystem is directly dependent on the number of butterfly species. Butterflies act as indicators in monitoring environmental health. Play an important role in food chains and food webs. Excellent pollinators Bio control of weeds Butterflies are very sensitive to pollution and have been used as bioindicators to detect the pollution levels.
Bwindi Researchers. "Category Archives: Butterflies." Bwindi Researchers. Wildlife Direct, 9 Jan. 2012. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
Use of genetically modified food linked to declining population of butterflies. Chung:
GMO most commonly refers to scientists modifying in labs not the forces of nature. The new study led by Tyler Flockhart, currently a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Guelph, showed that the number of milkweed plants in the U.S. corn belt, where most monarchs breed, has fallen 20 per cent over the past few decades. "It's a massive number of milkweeds — about 1.5 billion milkweed plants," he said.  This past winter, monarch butterfly numbers at the wintering grounds in Mexico fell to their lowest levels since records started being kept in 1993. (Associated Press) The study, published today in the Journal of Animal Ecology, shows this decline in milkweed is the main cause of the monarch's recent population decline, not deforestation in Mexico. If this milkweed loss continues, the study predicts, monarch populations will fall at least another 14 per cent and there is a five per cent chance they will be driven nearly to extinction over the next century. Study co-author Ryan Norris, a biology professor at the University of Guelph, said that "likely the biggest cause of loss of milkweed is the adoption of genetically modified crops." Farmers have been increasingly planting corn and soybeans resistant to herbicides, and then applying those herbicides liberally on their fields. That kills off plants between the rows of crops that aren't resistant, such as milkweed. That's been a big problem for the butterflies. Even now, 67 per cent of milkweed plants in the butterflies' breeding grounds are found in "agriculture-intensive landscapes," the study reported.
Chung, Emily. "Genetically Modified Crops Linked to Monarch Butterfly Decline." CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 05 June 2014. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
Impact of losing butterflies is mass extinction. Bardroff:
A keystone species, by definition, has the power to largely effect entire ecosystems simply by performing natural behaviors for survival. Impressive? We’d say so. Many ecologists consider apex predators such as sharks, killer whales, and wolves to be keystone organisms, since they maintain balance of biodiversity and resource (e.g. food) availability. From the top to the bottom of the food chain, there are many species of both flora and fauna that are crucial to the existence of their ecosystems as we know them. So, maybe ecosystems would collapse if keystone species go extinct, but how would this happen and why should we care? The planet is currently experiencing a mass extinction of life – one out of six mass extinctions that have occurred throughout Earth’s history (based on scientific estimations). Since the number of species on Earth is an ambiguous approximation, it is challenging to accurately quantify how many species are becoming extinct. However, according to the World Wildlife Fund, scientists believe between 10,000 and 100,000 species cease to exist every year due to habitat loss, resource depletion, climate change, and other factors. How could this be? Wouldn’t we hear about these organisms on the news? Perhaps the projected tens or hundreds of species going extinct each day are not the cute or beautiful creatures we are taught to care about. In fact, you may not be aware of many species that are actually very important to our own existence! If we lose keystone species, extinction rates will dramatically increase. We cannot afford to be losing more species! Take a look at some species we should be concerned about.
Bardroff, Jenna. "If These 8 Species Go Extinct, Entire Ecosystems Will Disappear." One Green Planet. N.p., 25 Sept. 2014. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
Agroecological CP
Counterplan is to recognize that the harms from use of GMO technologies outweigh the benefits in order to implement a new system of agriculture. Use of GMO food is rising in the sqou. Counterplan is necessary to challenge harms of DA and corporate greed. Agroecological agriculture is a force for grass-root rural change that would be independent from the cartel of powerful biotech/agribusiness companies. This model of agriculture is already providing real solutions for sustainable, productive agriculture that prioritizes the needs of farmers and consumers. It represents an alternative to corporate-controlled agriculture.
Agroecoculture is defined as an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles, and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain, or enhance ecological harmony. The primary goal of organic agriculture is to optimize the health and productivity of interdependent communities of soil life, plants, animals and people.
www.nationalsustainablesales.com/organic
Much of the needed food can be produced by small farmers located throughout the world using agroecological technologies Altieri:
In fact, new rural development approaches and low-input technologies spearheaded by farmers and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) around the world are already making a significant contribution to food security at the household, national, and regional levels in Africa, Asia and Latin America (Pretty, l995). Yield increases are being achieved by using technological approaches, based on agroecological principles that emphasize diversity, synergy, recycling and integration; and social processes that emphasize community participation and empowerment (Rosset, l999). When such features are optimized, yield enhancement and stability of production are achieved, as well as a series of ecological services such conservation of biodiversity, soil and water restoration and conservation, improved natural pest regulation mechanisms, and so on (Altieri et al., 1998). These results are a breakthrough for achieving food security and environmental preservation in the developing world, but their potential and further spread depends on investments, policies, institutional support, and attitude changes on the part of policy makers and the scientific community; especially the CGIAR who should devote much of its efforts to the 320 million poor farmers living in marginal environments. Failure to promote such people-centered agricultural research and development due to the diversion of funds and expertise towards biotechnology will forego an historical opportunity to raise agricultural productivity in economically viable, environmentally benign, and socially uplifting ways.
Altieri, Miguel A., and Peter Rosset. University of California, Berkeley and Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy"Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Help the Developing World." AgBioForum. AgBioForum, 22 Feb. 2000. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
Proper funding would solve better using agroecological approaches. Altieri 2:
As the private sector has exerted more and more dominance in advancing new biotechnologies, the public sector has had to invest a growing share of its scarce resources in enhancing biotechnological capacities in public institutions, including the CGIAR, and in evaluating and responding to the challenges posed by incorporating private sector technologies into existing farming systems. Such funds would be much better used to expand support for ecologically based agricultural research, as all the biological problems that biotechnology aims at can be solved using agroecological approaches. The dramatic effects of rotations and intercropping on crop health and productivity, as well as of the use of biological control agents on pest regulation have been confirmed repeatedly by scientific research. The problem is that research at public institutions increasingly reflects the interests of private funders at the expense of public good research, such as biological control, organic production systems and general agroecological techniques. Civil society must request for more research on alternatives to biotechnology by universities and other public organizations (Krimsky and Wrubel, l996). There is also an urgent need to challenge the patent system and intellectual property rights intrinsic to the World Trade Organization (WTO) which not only provide multinational corporations with the right to seize and patent genetic resources, but will also accelerate the rate at which market forces already encourage monocultural cropping with genetically uniform transgenic varieties. Based on history and ecological theory, it is not difficult to predict the negative impacts of such environmental simplification on the health of modern agriculture (Altieri, l996).
Altieri, Miguel A., and Peter Rosset. University of California, Berkeley and Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy"Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Help the Developing World." AgBioForum. AgBioForum, 22 Feb. 2000. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
AT Aff
Most innovations in agricultural biotechnology have been profit-driven rather than need-driven. Altieri:
The real thrust of the genetic engineering industry is not to make third world agriculture more productive, but rather to generate profits (Busch et al., l990). This is illustrated by reviewing the principle technologies on the market today: (1) herbicide resistant crops, such as Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" soybeans, seeds that are tolerant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, and (2) "Bt" (Bacillus thuringiensis) crops which are engineered to produce their own insecticide. In the first instance, the goal is to win a greater herbicide market-share for a proprietary product and, in the second, to boost seed sales at the cost of damaging the usefulness of a key pest management product (the Bacillus thuringiensis based microbial insecticide) relied upon by many farmers, including most organic farmers, as a powerful alternative to insecticides . These technologies respond to the need of biotechnology companies to intensify farmers' dependence upon seeds protected by so-called "intellectual property rights" which conflict directly with the age-old rights of farmers to reproduce, share or store seeds (Hobbelink, l991). Whenever possible corporations will require farmers to buy a company's brand of inputs and will forbid farmers from keeping or selling seed. By controlling germplasm from seed to sale, and by forcing farmers to pay inflated prices for seed-chemical packages, companies are determined to extract the most profit from their investment (Krimsky and Wrubel, l996).
Altieri, Miguel A., and Peter Rosset. University of California, Berkeley and Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy"Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Help the Developing World." AgBioForum. AgBioForum, 22 Feb. 2000. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.

Recent experimental trials have shown that genetically engineered seeds do not increase the yield of crops. Altieri:
A recent study by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Economic Research Service shows that in 1998 yields were not significantly different in engineered versus non-engineered crops in 12 of 18 crop/region combinations. In the six crop/region combinations where Bt crops or herbicide tolerant crops (HTCs) fared better, they exhibited increased yields between 5-30. Glyphosphate tolerant cotton showed no significant yield increase in either region where it was surveyed. This was confirmed in another study examining more than 8,000 field trials, where it was found that Roundup Ready soybean seeds produced fewer bushels of soybeans than similar conventionally bred varieties (USDA, l999).
Altieri, Miguel A., and Peter Rosset. University of California, Berkeley and Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy"Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Help the Developing World." AgBioForum. AgBioForum, 22 Feb. 2000. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
There are risks associated with eating GM foods. Altieri:
Many scientists claim that the ingestion of genetically engineered food is harmless. Recent evidence, however, shows that there are potential risks of eating such foods as the new proteins produced in such foods could: (1) act themselves as allergens or toxins; (2) alter the metabolism of the food producing plant or animal, causing it to produce new allergens or toxins; or (3) reduce its nutritional quality or value. In the case of (3), herbicide resistant soybeans can contain less isoflavones, an important phytoestrogen present in soybeans, believed to protect women from a number of cancers. At present, developing countries are importing soybean and corn from the United States, Argentina, and Brazil. Genetically engineered foods are beginning to flood the markets in the importing countries, yet no one can predict all their health effects on consumers, who are unaware that they are eating such food. Because genetically engineered food remains unlabeled, consumers cannot discriminate between genetically engineered (GE) and non-GE food, and should serious health problems arise, it will be extremely difficult to trace them to their source. Lack of labeling also helps to shield the corporations that could be potentially responsible from liability (Lappe and Bailey, l998).
Altieri, Miguel A., and Peter Rosset. University of California, Berkeley and Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy"Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Help the Developing World." AgBioForum. AgBioForum, 22 Feb. 2000. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.
GM foods accelerate pest resistance. Altieri:
Transgenic plants which produce their own insecticides, closely follow the pesticide paradigm, which is itself rapidly failing due to pest resistance to insecticides. Instead of the failed "one pest-one chemical" model, genetic engineering emphasizes a "one pest-one gene" approach, shown over and over again in laboratory trials to fail, as pest species rapidly adapt and develop resistance to the insecticide present in the plant (Alstad and Andow, l995). Not only will the new varieties fail over the short-to-medium term, despite so-called voluntary resistance management schemes (Mallet and Porter, l992), but in the process may render useless the natural Bt-pesticide which is relied upon by organic farmers and others desiring to reduce chemical dependence. Bt crops violate the basic and widely accepted principle of integrated pest management (IPM), which is that reliance on any single pest management technology tends to trigger shifts in pest species or the evolution of resistance through one or more mechanisms (NRC, l996). In general, the greater the selection pressure across time and space, the quicker and more profound the pests evolutionary response. An obvious reason for adopting this principle is that it reduces pest exposure to pesticides, retarding the evolution of resistance. But when the product is engineered into the plant itself, pest exposure leaps from minimal and occasional to massive and continuous exposure, dramatically accelerating resistance (Gould, l994). Bacillus thuringiensis will rapidly become useless, both as a feature of the new seeds and as an old standby sprayed when needed by farmers that want out of the pesticide treadmill (Pimentel et al., l989).
Altieri, Miguel A., and Peter Rosset. University of California, Berkeley and Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy"Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Help the Developing World." AgBioForum. AgBioForum, 22 Feb. 2000. Web. 26 Mar. 2017.

Tournament: pofo mofo | Round: 6 | Opponent: everybody | Judge: only god can judge me
We observe that we ought to value the upholding international law. 

International law is the most important impact in the round because it is agreed upon and contractual. The moral school of thought, contractarianism, states that while different actors have different conceptions of what is ‘good’ or ‘just’, contracts are the only way of generating real moral obligations because they outline what the common areas of morality are between different parties, and are agreed upon. Law generates obligations because it creates shared expectations. William Boardman writes:
Boardman, William S. “Coordination and the moral obligation to obey the law.” Ethics, vol. 97, no. 3, April 1987, pp. 546-557.

To a large extent, then, the usefulness of a criminal code does depends upon its enabling one to anticipate how others will behave and how they will expect oneself to behave. Depending upon how the limits of impermissible violence or fraud or negligence are drawn, A person forms expectations about the behavior of others and accordingly takes or omits steps to protect himself from risks or to avoid imposing risks on others who will not be expecting them. Thus We can find a variety main of alternative criminal codes, differing in where these lines are drawn. The thing which marks one of these alternative codes as the controlling or relevant one is that it has the status of law or custom rather than its being a rationally unique system of rules demanded by reason or morality.

And the United States is obligated to follow its obligations in the international arena. Krystyna Marek writes:
Marek, Krystyna. Identity and continuity of states in public international law. Librairie Droz, 1954.

The positive answer to this question lies in the very nature of international law. For international law is, above all, a legal order governing relations between independent states, that is to say, between separate and distinct entities 3. No international law would be either possible or necessary, without a clear delimitation of its subjects, which together form the international community 1. Thus, the independence of States forms the necessary prerequisite of international law, a condition which the latter could not renounce, without at the same time renouncing its own raison d’être. Just as the existence of a co-ordinated independent states cannot be conceived without a higher co-ordinating legal order 2,  so also the existence of this higher order cannot be conceived without these co-ordinated subjects, endowed with separate personality. International law is therefore merely fulfilling its primary function, when it undertakes the actual delimitatioin of States. 

International law defines the boundaries and functions of states. The only way we know what states are comes from the international agreements, so violations of those agreements disrespect the basis of the state in the first place. Therefore, we must maintain our international obligations concluded through international agreement. The resolution is a question of obligations rather than consequences because it implicates the way that states interact with eachother. Therefore, proving an obligation is sufficient to vote con even if the pro demonstrates that their world is better in a utilitarian sense. 

International agreements and UN sentiments indicate support for the two state solution. United Nations:
"Two-State Solution Only Way to Meet National Aspirations of Israelis, Palestinians, Secretary-General Tells International Conference on Peace." United Nations, June. 2016. Web. 02 Feb. 2017. 

The United Nations remains committed to supporting a negotiated, just, comprehensive and enduring two-State resolution for the people of Israel and Palestine. I personally commit to working with their leaders and the international community to advance their essential goals, until the last day of my tenure as Secretary- General of the United Nations. In this spirit, please accept my best wishes for a successful event that looks at past peace initiatives and lessons learned, current peace initiatives, and the way forward.
This sentiment is proven by the UN Security Council’s adoption of resolution 1397. United Nations:
"SECURITY COUNCIL DEMANDS IMMEDIATE CESSATION OF ALL VIOLENCE IN MIDDLE EAST; AFFIRMS VISION OF TWO STATES, ISRAEL AND PALESTINE." United Nations. United Nations, n.d. Web. 03 Mar. 2017.
Adopting resolution 1397 (2002) by a vote of 14 in favour to none against with 1 abstention (Syria), the Council affirmed a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, lived side by side within secure and recognized borders.  
The international court of justice has found that Israeli expansion is a violation of Palestine’s sovereignty and is a violation of the international law. This implicitly concedes the importance of the two state solutions because it recognizes a Palestinian claim to self-determination. Lain Scobbie writes:
Scobbie, Iain. "International Law Is Clear: Israeli Settlements Are Illegal." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 16 Dec. 2009. Web. 03 Mar. 2017.

Rozenman argues that Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which prohibits the transfer of parts of a state's population into territory it occupies, does not apply to nonforcible population transfers. On the contrary, as the authoritative commentary of this convention prepared by the International Committee of the Red Cross states, this prohibition was adopted precisely to prohibit the colonization of occupied territories. It does not distinguish between forcible and nonforcible population transfers. Article 49 prohibits any and all population transfers from the occupying power to occupied territory. In 2004, the International Court of Justice unanimously found that Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory breached Article 49.

Thus, you vote con because we proved that the United States has an obligation under international law to pressure Isreal to support a two state solution. However, if you accept that we look at consequences, you should still vote con because U.S. pressure is key to securing good ends. Al-Ghabi:
Al-Gharbi, Musa. “Why America Lacks Credibility in the Middle East.” Foreign Policy. 10 March 2015. 

It further fuels skepticism when America attempts to fight ISIS — a group largely empowered by previous U.S. support for other non-state actors in Iraq, Libya, and Syria — by training and arming new, ineffective, and unpopular proxy militias. Moreover, these new groups are often aligned with, and trained in, Saudi Arabia — the power most responsible for proliferating the ideology embraced by the so-called “Islamic State.” It seems disingenuous when the U.S. condemns Russia for funding non-state actors in Ukraine, or Pakistan for doing so in Afghanistan, or Iran in Lebanon — even as America expands its own support of insurgents in Syria. The Arab public is outraged when U.S. policymakers decry human rights violations elsewhere while continuing to support Israel and shield it from international accountability for its occupation of the West Bank or its wars on Gaza. And it doesn’t help at all when the Obama administration, among other failings, declines to prosecute clear and grievous
infractions like torture by its own intelligence agencies, while calling for regime change in other countries for the same sorts of infractions. When American representatives lecture others about upholding the very international rules and norms the U.S. government systematically and unapologetically violates through its drone strikes
and mass surveillance, enhanced interrogation, and extraordinary rendition programs, others will not take American rhetoric or ideals seriously.
Therefore, United States pressure on Isreal to pursue a two state solution would result in better relations in the region, which produces positive relations for the United States and good consequences for the world. And, violations of international law lead to negative consequences for the world, including war. The Malaysian Medical Association writes:
Malaysian Medical Association, 10-6-02 “11TH SEPTEMBER - DAY OF REMEMBRANCE,” http://www.mma.org.my/current_topic/sept.htm

At a time when global problems should be solved by cooperating and complying with multilateral legally-binding treaties, and by embracing the rule of law as valuable instruments for building common security and safe-guarding the long-term, collective interests of humanity, there are unmistable signs that powerful states are taking unilateral action, setting aside international treaties, and undermining international law. The principle of the rule of law implies that even the most powerful must comply with the law, even if it is difficult or costly or when superior economic, military and diplomatic power may seem to make compliance unnecessary.  The destruction of the symbols of American economic power and military might on 11th September is a salutary reminder that military power, including the possession of nuclear weapons, does not deter terrorists or confer security or invulnerability. It has prompted the Bush administration to declare "war on terror" and convinced it that a military response is the best way to fight terrorism on a global scale, without considering alternative, more effective ways of combating terrorism, such as addressing the root causes of terrorism. The greatest betrayal of those who died on 11th September 2001 would be to not recognise that there are non-violent ways of resolving conflict. This is a difficult, uncertain path to take, whereas violence and war are easy, predictable options. The lesson of 11th September is that our collective survival depends upon forging cooperative, just and equitable relationships with each other; in rejecting violence and war; and in pursuing non-violent resolutions to conflict. The alternative is a world perpetually divided, continually at war, and possibly destroying itself through environmental degradation or the use of weapons of mass destruction.

Therefore, even if the pro wins that you should evaluate who produces the best outcomes, if we prove that the pro violates an international law that will always lead to the worst outcomes so you should vote for us regardless.