In a democracy: Civil disobedience is an appropriate weapon in the fight for justice.

First the resolution does not have a time line, the word "is" can be defined as 'to continue or remain as before' this takes into consideration the past and the present as a whole, which means we still need to take into consideration when it was necessary in the past. And yes i have to agree that everyone over the age of 18 has a right to vote, but that doesn't mean the law is moral. Think about it, in the past the laws that allowed slavery and segregation were probably thought of as moral because they were what everyone was used to. They saw blacks as inferior, so it seemed right. Today we know, because of the CD that they are not inferior, with out civil disobedience no one can really predict how long, if ever, it would have taken for people to realize these laws were immoral and wrong. Voting for a person who has the same morals as you will not always solve the problem though, being as he would need the majority vote, not just the person alone. Also i would like to note that who i am a supporter of and what seems apparent i should know holds no value in this debate. You stated in your argument "I would agree, there have been instances where CD has worked in the past... Now that everyone can voice their opinion we have a reflection of all of society in our laws. CD is no longer necessary." You have agreed that CD has worked, which means that it can work when other means fail, which is all the resolution is asking. Also when you stated that "CD is no longer necessary." i take that to mean that you have stated it once was necessary. And there being no time line on the resolution this statement has agreed with the pro side. If you'll notice i stated anti terrorism, meaning CD is used to minimize terrorism. I can actually give you evidence about that argument. It comes from Jeffrey R. Young, The chronicle of higher education, november 21, 2003, pNA, Online, INFOTRAC Expanded Academic ASAP. "When Nathaniel Heatwole smuggled box cutters, matches, molding clay, and a small bottle of bleach onto two commercial airliners this fall, he called it an act of civil disobedience, and told authorities that he meant to expose weaknesses in airport security. The FBI called it carrying concealed and dangerous weapons onto an aircraft, and promptly arrested him." He told the authorities about it--meaning he wasn't planning on getting away with it which coincides with CD. He sent them an email that explained that he had committed "and act of civil disobedience with the aim of improving public safety for the air-traveling public" If he would have just gone to the authorities and courts you can bet that they would have just dismissed him and not have paid attention, but since he proved to them that there was flaws they put him in jail, because what he did was illegal, but you can also bet they fixed the problems. He saw some of the laws that were wrong, and committed CD to fix them because no other ways would have worked. I didn't contradict my self, if that came across confusing i apologize, what i meant was that i don't believe CD should be used first, because the resolution is only about weather it should be an option, and since, as you agreed, it can work, it definitely should be, an option. Thanks for debating me! This is my first debate and was fun :D