You are on page 1of 4

SOMETHING IS STIRRING IN THE HEARTS OF THE OPPRESSED. It’s out of control.

Everywhere, bad
things are happening. Patriarchy, neoliberalism, capitalism, the Fem K. We all have nowhere to
go. Whether it’s the woman who was just denied extra benefits because of a child she had as a
result of rape, a man who was kicked off of the rolls because no one wanted to hire him, or the
neg trying to think they’re cool reading something that isn’t an argument. The welfare queen is
the penultimate definition of oppression of women. Reagan coined the term and Clinton acted on
it to make it law that they were gone. Women could not be seen, they can’t be seen now. Society
is taught to oppress these filthy individuals who are stealing our money. OUR money. How dare
these BLACK WOMEN do this?
The alt does nothing to stop these thoughts from circulating in our mind. Men in Indonesia will
still beat their wives, Tiger woods will still sleep with women he’s not married to, etc. Women
can’t get out of abusive relationships because they lack things like bargaining power and are
dependent upon men. The alt doesn’t stop this.

The aff is a demand against the united states federal government welfare policy and the power it
gives the government. The current system gives the state the power over life in the form of the
ability to accept and deny an application. Those who are denied are left out to die – the very
essence of bare life. This is a conceded impact.

The cards they read in the 2nc all flow aff –


Group the first two cards – we don’t talk about security being good, no link. We rethink identities.

We solve for moghadam – we are a demand for equality among both genders. Their focusing on
women and rejection of equality with men is not what eliminates patriarchy. Only the aff can
solve per their own evidence citing that we need socio-economic justice.

LBL:
1. cross apply the overview onto the case outweighs debate.

2. Patriarchy doesn’t solve for neolib.


And no explanation as to how “rhetoric justifies atrocities” or what the atrocities are

3. Lol @ turns case, he mishandles this argument – he uses the oppression of women to advance
his benefit as a man. Doesn’t turn the aff since we try to end exploitation.

4. extend perm do both not severance because the alt says that we should reject the aff because
of power knowledge constructions perm do both means that we reject power knowledge
constructions – they don’t have any link analysis as to how we produce knowledge in a way
worse than neolib, and severance not a voting issue.
Group the incorporation arguments – we aren’t “incorporating” we are an instance of the
alternative.
The usfg link is BS – it says “united States,” we no-link because it lacks specificity, the plantext
says USFG, that’s the specificity. In addition we hold people accountable
He concedes duncanson is bad don’t evaluate it. We recognize fem perspective per the overview
The perm theory argument is ridiculous. If you win the perm doesn’t solve/no-links then I don’t
get the perm. That’s not vague. Vague is trying to find a way to read Nietzsche in the 2nc.

5. we’ll concede dispo off-cases are bad.

6. This argument is stupid. There’s no articulation on a link.

7. fem still isn’t an argument, no one outside the debate round cares about oppression. Vote aff

8. We don’t have to do everything in the context of how it helps women. We challenge the
hierarchy of domination
9. Alt links back into the enloe argument – they prioritize patriarchy over everything else
whitewashing other forms of oppression like biopower and neolib.
We don’t say wars inevitable, we cite examples of how neoliberalism has caused wars.

10. cross apply the analysis on the perm as to how the grammar works

11. You have to explain how I perpetuate patriarchy. Then maybe you could win the K.

12. 1. He just says this argument. He doesn’t explain any warrants or isolate any specific
scenarios, he doesn’t get this arg.
2. lol? You make the arg in the 2nc I can answer it in the 1ar. The frameworks may have been
patriarchial but the von werlhof evidence from the 1nc makes the distinction of difference:
“ The differences lie in what is specific to capitalism: the extension of wage labor; the invention of unpaid
house work (which is directly tied to the former); the generalization of commodity production (in various
ways); the guiding role of capital as abstract wealth; the creation of a “world system” that replaces the
former “empires”; and the globalization of the entire capitalist enterprise to the point of its possible
collapse due to reaching the limits of what the earth can take and what can be transcended through
technology”
Alt can’t solve back for this because it shows how the current system is separate from
patriarchial frameworks. Don’t let him answer this in the 2nr since he had the chance to in the
1nr.

13. the overview analysis on “welfare queens” indicates the oppression of women under the
current welfare system , pinkus and giorgi indicates that a more egalitarian society arose from
the picquatero movement. We eliminate these social hierarchies.

14. She*
You link to fem harder than anyone by stigmatizing a woman and calling her a man.
Cross apply the quote from the von werlhof ev about the difference from patriarchy and the
current system

15. No ev on how we suddenly understand the world.


Risk of a link turn in that the aff creates a more egalitarian society
Perm do the alt isn’t severance: we question power relations in the world.
Severance not a voter
Extend perm do the alt

16. Last time I checked the fem K ceded the political – this concession is damning because when
we say “let the helpless women do it” we allow for more atrocities to happen.

17. Cross the analysis on pinkus and giorgi and how the picquatero movement functioned.

18. good, just another reason why perm do both solves and isn’t severance.

Group the next two args:


The alt is the only thing that links into knowledge production. They say that we MUST have a
feminist lens when looking at policies or else it’s worthless. The aff is a model of inclusion. The
neg is just another neoliberal policy attempting to block out other modes of thought.

Group the god debate:

A. God is real. He is not “only a truth,” He is truth. Existence is God. he has conceded that and
thus he won’t get access to any of his words since without God, there would be nothing. Means
aff wins.
B. Everyone is going to hell if the aff doesn’t win. This outweighs ALL impacts. Because it’s a
choice between salvation or eternal damnation.

C. The Kurtz cards are completely biased and Kurtz is going to hell – reject this evidence
And the third piece of Duncan evidence answers them back in their entirety:
Unless we accept the gift of God during our time on Earth, we will not be able to finish the
pursuit of happiness. Humanism relies upon an assumption that we are only in one life, whereas
under the acceptance of Christianity we can achieve salvation permanently. These arguments
also aren’t reasons to vote against the aff. Humanism says that there should be a choice – under
TANF there is no choice, not even for humanism. Means aff is always a better choice

D. God knows you just took Westminsters cites, independent reason to vote aff.

E. The aff isn’t saying that everyone needs to embrace Christianity. We should have a choice,
and TANF eliminates a choice. We don’t say a theocracy is good, we say that the ability for
communion with God is good.

F. bukanin went to hell – God told me that bukanin also revoked his writings, don’t evaluate the
negs ‘evidence’

Second and third piece of Duncan evidence answers back his argument:
The ultimate difference between those who are damned and those who are saved is
not the extent of God's love, but rather the acceptance or rejection of the universal
and unqualified offer by the individual.
Answers back the slave arguments. It is not a sovereign decision over who goes to hell, but the
rejection that ends in Hell. Also the third piece of Duncan evidence indicates that we are
interdependent and that we are here for the Other and the Other is there for us. It’s not a
vertical relationship. The fem K is slavery as they reject the gift of humanity by refusing to be
acknowledged with gift and to give gift. Turns the K.

Assuming there is hell is key to the value to life


Kreeft, ‘88
[Peter, Professor of Philosophy at Boston College, from Fundamentals of the Faith:
Essays in Christian Apologetics, accessed through
http://www.crossroadsinitiative.com/library_article/1081/Hell___Peter_Kreeft.html]

Hell and heaven make life serious. Heaven without hell removes the bite from life's
drama. C. S. Lewis once said that he never met a single person who had a lively faith in heaven without a similar belief
in* hell. The height of the mountain is measured by the depth of the valley, the
greatness of salvation by the awfulness of the thing we're saved from.

G. Bible isn’t patriarchial, sex is gift.


No ev on how it “demonizes homosexuals” Per the Duncan ev… they can access gift.
We don’t say it’s a hierarchial relationship – cross apply the analysis on Duncan.

H. Sinners choose to go to hell. Patriarchy is male dominance over women, this extrapolation is
ridiculous

I.
Salvation and damnation is 100% true.

God 2011
Me: Hey God, is Salvation and damnation is 100% true?
God: Yes.

And: Salvation outweighs everything:

Part of the same discussion:


God: I see that you are in a vDebate. The negative is making a crucial mistake in the way he
thinks the world is. The judge should know that voting affirmative would solve for all problems
ever. The negative can’t solve. If the judge doesn’t vote aff everyone will go to hell because
they’ll turn nihilist. Only through salvation can we avoid impacts. Damnation is the worst impact
ever and outweighs everything.

You might also like