Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

LD Debate Jan/Feb


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 InItToWinIt

InItToWinIt

    Junior-Varsity

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
1
Okay
  • Name:Zoe
  • School:Perry High School

Posted 30 January 2017 - 07:28 PM

Hey everyone,

 

I was wondering if anyone had contention ideas for the negation side of the current LD topic: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. I'm currently running hate speech as my main argument(s), but I was wondering if there were better ideas out there? Thank you!


  • 0

"Perm Aff then the non-exclusionary parts of the Neg" --What I should've said to win round 6 at National Qualifiers 

 

I'd sell my soul for the Cosmic Lobster K
 


#2 TheSnowball

TheSnowball

    Hall of Fame

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,767 posts
1,148
Excellent
  • Name:Ryan

Posted 31 January 2017 - 06:35 AM

Here's a court case where they reversed a KKK member's conviction for "advocat[ing] . . . the duty, necessity, or propriety *445 of crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform" due to free speech.

https://scholar.goog...=en&as_sdt=2006
  • 0

Daily Evidence Card!
Exodus Files!

This cross-ex is taking too long.

Kafka 25 (Franz, Novelist, Translated by David Wyllie, "The Trial", 1925) //Snowball

K. was informed by telephone that there would be a small hearing concerning his case the following Sunday. He was made aware that these cross examinations would follow one another regularly, perhaps not every week but quite frequently. On the one hand it was in everyone’s interest to bring proceedings quickly to their conclusion, but on the other hand every aspect of the examinations had to be carried out thoroughly without lasting too long because of the associated stress. For these reasons, it had been decided to hold a series of brief examinations following on one after another. Sunday had been chosen as the day for the hearings so that K. would not be disturbed in his professional work. It was assumed that he would be in agreement with this, but if he wished for another date then, as far as possible, he would be accommodated. Cross-examinations could even be held in the night, for instance, but K. would probably not be fresh enough at that time. Anyway, as long as K. made no objection, the hearing would be left on Sundays. It was a matter of course that he would have to appear without fail, there was probably no need to point this out to him. He would be given the number of the building where he was to present himself, which was in a street in a suburb well away from the city centre which K. had never been to before.


#3 PailAmbrose

PailAmbrose

    Champion

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 286 posts
139
Excellent
  • Name:Paul
  • School:KSU

Posted 31 January 2017 - 09:43 AM

There haven't been court rulings (that I know of), but some consider revenge porn to be protected by the 1st Amendment. I think 99.99% of people would argue we should ban it though
  • 0

"They have done the most destructive, entirely insane thing that has ever been done. They've degraded debate. it's offensive. I'm sorry that you judges have had to listen to this, it's people like them that have destroyed the debate community"

 

-Missouri's reaction to a cap K


#4 AQuackDebater

AQuackDebater

    Kind of a fascist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 564 posts
268
Excellent
  • Name:Patrick Fox
  • School:Jack C. Hays High School

Posted 31 January 2017 - 10:42 AM

 

Hey everyone,

 

I was wondering if anyone had contention ideas for the negation side of the current LD topic: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. I'm currently running hate speech as my main argument(s), but I was wondering if there were better ideas out there? Thank you!

PM me for stuff if you want, I'm cool to trade. But my neg strat is

-Revenge Porn, like PailAmbrose says

-Funding, under Title IX universities have to ban harassing speech, even though it's protected under the FA, and not restricting that makes them lose federal funding.

-Hate Speech is good.

-Cyberbullying, FA applies to internet hate speech too

-Kant, seditious speech is protected, there are a bunch of issues with that, like the right to sedition means the right to destroy the state which justifies the annihilation of right

-International Law, that banned hate speech, human rights violations undermine ILaw, ILaw solves multiple extinction scenarios

I have some other stuff, but that's all I know off the top of my head.

As for court cases, look into Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier. It was about student journalism, I use it for a court legitimacy/precedent DA.


  • 1
"Foolish baby quokka. If the only way to vote for Baudrillard is to vote against him, then voting against him would be voting for him which means you have to vote against the team that is against Baudrillard to not vote for him, and therefore, vote against Baudrillard."

#5 AQuackDebater

AQuackDebater

    Kind of a fascist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 564 posts
268
Excellent
  • Name:Patrick Fox
  • School:Jack C. Hays High School

Posted 31 January 2017 - 10:47 AM

 

 

PM me for stuff if you want, I'm cool to trade. But my neg strat is

-Revenge Porn, like PailAmbrose says

-Funding, under Title IX universities have to ban harassing speech, even though it's protected under the FA, and not restricting that makes them lose federal funding.

-Hate Speech is good.

-Cyberbullying, FA applies to internet hate speech too

-Kant, seditious speech is protected, there are a bunch of issues with that, like the right to sedition means the right to destroy the state which justifies the annihilation of right

-International Law, that banned hate speech, human rights violations undermine ILaw, ILaw solves multiple extinction scenarios

I have some other stuff, but that's all I know off the top of my head.

As for court cases, look into Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier. It was about student journalism, I use it for a court legitimacy/precedent DA.

 

Also Cap links to everything. And the PIC ground on this topic is huge, provided your circuit is pretty progressive.


  • 0
"Foolish baby quokka. If the only way to vote for Baudrillard is to vote against him, then voting against him would be voting for him which means you have to vote against the team that is against Baudrillard to not vote for him, and therefore, vote against Baudrillard."

#6 nathan_debate

nathan_debate

    Regular/Old School

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,736 posts
745
Excellent

Posted 01 February 2017 - 08:03 PM

I think this understanding is pretty apt in some respects:

 

There haven't been court rulings (that I know of), but some consider revenge porn to be protected by the 1st Amendment. I think 99.99% of people would argue we should ban it though

 

It does point to limits.  It points out that speech isn't content neutral.  It also intersects with privacy and the right to control one's body, which I don't suspect is at the core of the conflict.

 

However, in terms of the resolution I would suggest thats either feds. or states or locals, not per se a question of university enforcement.

 

Update:

 

The part about Supreme Court cases I don't think is true:

 

https://www.insidehi...s-campus-speech

 

[these two examples seem non-resolutional in terms of what its true focus is and ought to be]

 

Also I believe speech codes have been a supreme court issue.  For instance:

 

http://www.firstamen...s-speech-codes/

 

https://www.thefire....w-speech-codes/

 

https://www.thefire....ech-codes-2016/

 

[this later article primarily speaks to the issue at the end in terms of incitement & violence]

 

Go search out those Amicus briefs (also called friends of the court on a case by case basis) & I'm sure there are tons of law review articles on this topic.

 

https://en.wikipedia...iki/Speech_code

 

here is a law review article I ran across:

 

http://digitalcommon...=journalismdiss


Edited by nathan_debate, 01 February 2017 - 08:19 PM.

  • 0

Check out Learn Policy Debate here: http://learnpolicyde....wordpress.com/






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users