Felons Ought to Retain the Right to Vote in a Democratic Society

I affirm: Felons ought to retain the right to vote in a democratic society. Definitions: Democratic society: society where the government is decided by the people, either directly or through representatives Felon: one who has committed a felony Retain: to keep in use. Observations: 1) The resolution states felon. All ex-felons are essentially felons as they have been convicted of a felony and therefore the negative must prove that all felons should lose the right to vote. 2) The definition of "felon" states one who "has" committed a felony. This indicates past events and thus it is the burden of the affirmative to prove that felons in society should retain the right to vote. My value for this debate is A Democratic Society, which is the inherent value indicated by the resolution. The resolution specifically states a democratic society, thus is should be the highest value. The value of a democratic society is upheld by the value criterion of protection of rights Since in a democratic society the government exists solely for the people, then therefore it is only logical that a democratic society's government ought to protect its citizens' rights. Contention 1) Right of self-determination. This is the right to shape the conditions of one's own existence and pursue one's own happiness. Underneath the classic inalienable rights, a democratic government ought to ensure people have this right, otherwise the government would not be just. Without the right to vote one has no say in government and control of the state that they are forced to live under and abide by the laws of. Therefore, they cannot possibly control their own life when they have no say in the government that controls their life. Additionally, granting felons the right to vote infringes neither on anyone's right to vote or right of self-determination. Contention2) The negative is punishing the person's crime already through incarceration, yet at the same time taking away their right to vote. In terms of felon disenfranchisement, the government is punishing twice; once in jail, and once out of jail. This is known as double jeopardy, or punishing a crime twice. The 5th Amendment states "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." Also, we do not give people a lifelong ban on marriage or freedom of speech, so why would we give them a lifelong ban on voting? It is excessive punishment to incarcerate someone and at the same time take away all their political influence and right of self-determination. ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((REFUTE))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) --Value: Social Contract- This is not specifically stated by the resolution, however mine is and thus should be looked at above his. ---VC- Societal Welfare Link this back to my VC. It is not possible to uphold societal welfare unless you protect of the citizens' rights and thus if you are even to look at his VC you must look at my VC first. Additionally he provides no link between this and his Value and C1. --Contention 1: "By breaking the social contract, citizens have forfeited their right to vote. By granting any felon the right to vote would contradict the purpose of the social contract." However, a) When a felon commits a crime, yes they break the social contract, which is why they are incarcerated. However as I show in my second contention it is unjust to punish them additionally by taking their right to vote away. b) Also, it is feudal to continually deny felons a place in the social contract. Once a felon exits prison, although still a felon they should then re-enter the social contract. Should we not allow them a chance to become one of society once more?