Against the Principle of Criminal Justice

Dear adjudicators, Before we start our rebuttals on opposition, please allow me to restate our definition again: this House should allow medical experiments on prisoners who are sentenced to death without consent, under the supervision of U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. We would appreciate it if the opposition could get involved more in this debate by giving her counterviews under our definition. We do realize that most medical experiments are cruel, so we scope medical experiments for vaccine development only, and only when facing the threat of a pandemic outbreak. We will begin with a rebuttal showing how our thoughts and arguments were misperceived by the opposition and also clarify our position, already outlined in our definition, further. Rebuttal #1: There is a clear distinction made between the rights of an innocent citizen and convicts sentenced to the death penalty. Political rights include: * Natural justice (procedural fairness) in law (such as the rights of the accused, including the right to a fair trial; due process; the right to seek redress or a legal remedy) * Individual political freedom, including rights of individuals (freedom of thought and conscience, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of movement) and the right to participate in civil society and politics (freedom of association, right to assemble, right to petition, right to vote) Civil rights may include: * Ensuring peoples' physical integrity and safety * Protection from private (non-government) discrimination (based on gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, etc.) * Equal access to health care, education, culture, etc. Civil and political rights comprise the first portion of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (with economic, social and cultural rights comprising the second portion). Political rights are considered to be negative rights, whereas civil rights belong to the positive rights category. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_and_political_rights]] And then let’s take a look at what rights prisoners have at the moment: * Right to be protected by authorities in the case of assault or rape * Right to Medical Treatment * Right to freedom of expression, reading materials, and communication * Right to express concern with the prison's standard of living * Right to a court of law with regards to prison authorities! * Right to freedom of religion * Right to access to a court of law (mentioned above) * Right to food and clothing [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners%27_rights]] As government, we have been keeping these most important basic rights for prisoners while their liberty is deprived, which is also admitted by the opposition in her last point. So here, we are very glad that the opposition side stands at our side for the first time. However, the prisoners who are going back to society are not in the scope of our definition. We hope the opposition could read our definition again word by word. The prisoners who are sentenced to death is the group we are talking about. We believe that U.S. judicial system has clearly realized how much harm these people bring to the society, and thus how much less rights they have than other prisoners who commit lighter crimes. Therefore, we should not just give those death penalized more rights because we think they deserve sympathy and it is acceptable to infringe on the rights of criminals sentenced to death. We should be more rational on this issue. So I hope our thought will not make our opposition cry. Rebuttal #2: From that the government’s perspective we must weigh the good versus the harm before we make any decision, especially in the case of a pandemic which could deprive human life anywhere anytime in a large quantity. As our first argument states that using death penalized prisoners saves more time, which could lead to a result of saving more human lives. Also, vaccine testing is inevitable before a massive test. Our responsibility is to make a utilitarian decision on what does the most good for the most people, while minimizing the infringement on the rights of citizens. To protect more innocent people from pandemic disease, our government decides to choose the prisoners who are sentenced to death. The sacrifice of some rights on the part of prisoners convicted to the death sentence is considered a necessary evil. So obviously, the weight of the good of using death-penalized prisoners is much heavier than the harm.