“Dear Rowland Hall BL,
We stand here today in the round as participants in this great activity known as debate. Our love for this activity is evidence by our participation within it and is supported by our ability to debate in the first place. However, we believe that certain norms of debate have evolved and betrayed its original purpose as an open, distinct public sphere. Exclusion still pervades out forum of communication. This is not an accident but however, societal norms have penetrated our activity and have brainwashed our perspectives. Alex and I believe that oo many view exclusion as natural and inevitable. We believe that this understanding is what perpetuates violence such as the exclusion of feminine identity within our activity and in Africa, South of the Sahara.
So friends, lovers, and even those who can’t stand us:
We want to extend our deepest sincerities to everyone in the room, and indeed to all of those in the activity. Love to you, judge., love to you negative team, and love to the feminine identities that are being excluded in the public sphere in Africa, south of the Sahara.
Thus we defend:
“Thus Alex and I stand resovled based upon reconstituted understanding of the relationshiop between the excluded femininity and the falsely constructed dichotomy of the pub/priv sphere. Thus, we affirm the imagination that the US executive should repeal the Mexico City Policy.”
Defended removing the Mexico City Policy in this round, but advised following the round to be completely critical.
1ac w/ cites
The foundation for exclusion through current law excludes women society wide. A woman’s proper role is waway from any other political discussion. This serves as a basis for sexual discrimination in all sectors of our environment.
Abrams 96 Cornell intl. Law journal
Removal of Women legitimizes genocideal rape and destroys cultures and communities.
Boundaries of acceptable discourse define “worthless lives”
Courts of love – Les Precieuses – women forced themselves into the public sphere by reconstituting traditional law.
Courts of love serve to explore the public/private sphere as conceived in their imaginary space. Reconceptualizes feminine identity.
2ac Tricks, Add-Ons,
Answers To Off Case Args
AT: K
Alt can’t solve impacts – discourse is inevitably excluded. Case has to happen, justifying perm.
Perm od the plan and all parts of the altnernative that don’t reject the aff.
Perm solves – we create a new form of politics. Only plan ends esclusion.
We must reconstitute current knowledge.
The plan somces first – pre-req. to action.
Our love is a form of law that generates and ethical relationship with the received; it opens up public space for the existence and creation of altenrative space and a new republic of the soul.
Peter Goodrich, Corporation of London Prof. of Law, 1997 Yale Journal of Law and Humanities, Summer, lexis.
No link – arguments are predicated off the form of politics in the status quo – they don’ take into account our “love letter.” That’s Goodrich 97
The plan can solve for all of the K. The fact that the court was an outlaw court because it did not abide by legal limitation made it possible for the court to govern in revolutionary ways, able to re-write an interpret laws. Goodrich ’07 “the feminine republic…epistolary justice”
McDonogh AFF
Round # 1
vs Team: Rowland Hall St. Marks
Judge: Shunta Jordan
Plan Text
“Dear Rowland Hall BL,We stand here today in the round as participants in this great activity known as debate. Our love for this activity is evidence by our participation within it and is supported by our ability to debate in the first place. However, we believe that certain norms of debate have evolved and betrayed its original purpose as an open, distinct public sphere. Exclusion still pervades out forum of communication. This is not an accident but however, societal norms have penetrated our activity and have brainwashed our perspectives. Alex and I believe that oo many view exclusion as natural and inevitable. We believe that this understanding is what perpetuates violence such as the exclusion of feminine identity within our activity and in Africa, South of the Sahara.
So friends, lovers, and even those who can’t stand us:
We want to extend our deepest sincerities to everyone in the room, and indeed to all of those in the activity. Love to you, judge., love to you negative team, and love to the feminine identities that are being excluded in the public sphere in Africa, south of the Sahara.
Thus we defend:
“Thus Alex and I stand resovled based upon reconstituted understanding of the relationshiop between the excluded femininity and the falsely constructed dichotomy of the pub/priv sphere. Thus, we affirm the imagination that the US executive should repeal the Mexico City Policy.”
Defended removing the Mexico City Policy in this round, but advised following the round to be completely critical.
1ac w/ cites
The foundation for exclusion through current law excludes women society wide. A woman’s proper role is waway from any other political discussion. This serves as a basis for sexual discrimination in all sectors of our environment.Abrams 96 Cornell intl. Law journal
Removal of Women legitimizes genocideal rape and destroys cultures and communities.
Boundaries of acceptable discourse define “worthless lives”
Courts of love – Les Precieuses – women forced themselves into the public sphere by reconstituting traditional law.
Courts of love serve to explore the public/private sphere as conceived in their imaginary space. Reconceptualizes feminine identity.
2ac Tricks, Add-Ons,
Answers To Off Case Args
AT: K- Alt can’t solve impacts – discourse is inevitably excluded. Case has to happen, justifying perm.
- Perm od the plan and all parts of the altnernative that don’t reject the aff.
- Perm solves – we create a new form of politics. Only plan ends esclusion.
- We must reconstitute current knowledge.
- The plan somces first – pre-req. to action.
- Our love is a form of law that generates and ethical relationship with the received; it opens up public space for the existence and creation of altenrative space and a new republic of the soul.
Peter Goodrich, Corporation of London Prof. of Law, 1997 Yale Journal of Law and Humanities, Summer, lexis.