In a Democratic Society Felons ought to Retain the Right to Vote

Ok. I will first reattack my opponents case/his defense of my attacks. Then go through some key voter issues and show why each of these swings in favor of the Negative side. So with the Values/Value Criterion. Sorry I though my opponents value was Equality in the broad sense of the term, not specifically political equality. I completely agree with my opponent, that political equality is important in a democratic society and everyones votes in society have to be held equally. Actually let me rephrase that, everyone should have the equal opportunity to vote. And felons did have the equal opportunity to vote, until they violated societies rights. Now the question is do felons belong to society? I will get back to this later I would first like to answer his attacks on my Value. My opponents attack on my value was that it was not topical, and that justice is the foundation of communism. However that is not the case. I have 3 responses to this 1- He said that justice is contradictory to democracy because a knowlegable voter deserves to vote more than an ignorant voter. This might be the case in some societies, but not DEMOCRATIC societies were everyone IN society is "due" the equal opportunity to vote. 2- He said that justice lead to communism. This is not true. Infact because communism is based off the belief that everyone is equal, and everyone is given equal property, equal pay... Take China for example, while China is not communist because communism requires the cooperation of the entire world and all other countries to be communist, it is commonly refered to as communist, and probably the closest thing we have to communism. Everyone in China is given equal everything. 3- A democracy must uphold justice. If it does not chaos ensues. You cannot allow a murderor to run around society killing people. Because he is a murderor he is no longer due the right to liberty, and in order to protect society, liberty must be taken away. Justice must be valued over equality in this debate because as I have said before equality of any kind only exists as long as people believe they are equal. Felons who have murdered/raped/and commited heinous crimes against society don't abide by societies laws and should not be given the benefits of belonging to society. The way in which we ensure that people believe they are equal is by upholding justice. If you are the President of the U.S. and you kill someone, you are due no more or no less than the punishment given to a stoner who commits the same crime. Removing a felon's right to vote is one way in which society send the message that commiting a serious crime will have a serios consequence regardless of who they are. As for his observation 1 There's really no point in bring it up now because I don't really believe I've broken any of them, but if I have and my opponent brings it up, I will have no way to defend myself, as his rebuttal will be the last one. As for his observation 2 What we have to ask ourselves in this debate is not whether or not felons should be able to vote, It is whether or not felons should RETAIN the right to vote. So lets take that felon from 1960, it's true he is still a felon in 2008, but he might be able to vote because(lets say he was imprisoned for 10 years) during those ten years he did not keep the right to vote, and therefore did not retain them, he did however regain the right to vote. A felon is still a felon regardless of whether or not that felon has the right to vote. The right to vote and being a felon are two completely different things, you can have someone who commits a felony but is able to vote be considered a felon as you can have someone who commits a felony who doesn't have the right to vote be considered a felon. Secondly I do not have to advocate that felons loose the right to vote forever, I have to advocate that they should loose their right to vote for a period of time because that would mean that that felon did not retain the the right to vote which would still be negating the resolution, which is the burden on the Negative side. Observation 3 Yes of course felons don't deserve the right to vote. They have commited a heinous crime against society, they have voilated rights. A felony isn't some petty misdeameanor, it is Murder/Rape/Assualt/Fraud/Treason/Embezzlement/Grand theft. They have shown that their judgement is flawed and if they cannot govern their own lives without violating society, they cannot be expected to govern society. In fact felons are law breakers, and therefore they can have no hand in making the laws the rest of society abides by. When you hold a ballot in your hand, you hold the fate of your entire country in you hand. Now ask yourselves this do we really want a felon, someone who has shown that their judgement is so flawed to the extent they have voilated societies right, to hold your fate in their hands? Observation 4 Yes commiting a crime does remove you from society to a certain extent. But it does not create a biopower. For example are non-citizens part of our society? Not really. Are we going to be able to kill them without facing repercussions? No. Or children. are they in society? yes (meaning they live in society) but are they out of society(can they vote?)No. Are we going to kill them without facing repercussions? No. So removing a felon from society for a certain period of time, does not create a biopower. Furthermore during the holocaust the races who were being oppressed did nothing to provoke their removal from society, whereas felons have violated societies rights have made that choice to remove themselves from society. Now to 1a and 2a My opponent seems to be thinking that everyone out there is perfect(obviously not true otherwise we wouldn't have felons) and they will automatically vote for whatever is good for society. Lets say we are voting on a preposition to outlaw the manufacturing of tobacco. Are tobacco companies going to be happy? Are they/ or anyone affiliated with tobacco(i.e smokers, employees...) going to vote for this proposition? No Is it obviously for the good of society? Yes. In fact what is good is different to a lot of people, and the outcome of an election can change if felons vote because EVERY vote matters. Felon voting does have harms, it would basically lessan the severity of commiting a felony, because the punishment would not be as severe. It would allow people who have no respect for society, and who have shown a blatant disregard for societies laws to have a hand in making those laws. Democracy-Government by the people; that form of government in which the sovereign power resides in the people as a whole, and is exercised either directly by them (as in the small republics of antiquity) or BY OFFICERS ELECTED BY THEM.(OED) Therefore a democracy does exist if it has elected officials voting on your behalf. P.S. OED stand for Oxford English Dictionary, just FYI. Again with the felons out of jail voting. Negating the resolution doesn't mean that all felons can't vote. It means that all felons should lose their right to vote for a certain period of time. My opponent seems to want to force me to say that Felons should lose the right to vote indefinitely. But that is not what I am saying. I am saying felons should not retain the right to vote. There is a difference. Now for some voter issues. Will allowing felons to vote harm society? Yes as I have already said felons believe they are above society, and felons do not abide by societies laws. Should people who believe themselves above society vote? No, a democratic society is run by the people in society. For example children aren't allowed to vote beacuse most of them don't pay taxes, and they son't really contribute to society. They can't serve in the army, and they are held to a different regard than the rest of the people in society. Actually I have 89 letters left, so because I have negated all my opponents points, I urge for a Neg Vote