In a democratic society, felons ought to retain the right to vote

I will start out by attacking my opponent's case, and then move on to defending my own. My opponent's counter-definitions have some problems which I will show: A Democratic Society – An ideal society which provides its' citizens equal representation -Democratic society doesn't have to be ideal Felony- A violation of the Social Contract, which results in the felon being put in jail or being put to death -This is not the dictionary definition Social Contract – The gathering of the rights society values the most, which is guaranteed under the Social Contract. In addition, the rights that are sacrificed to protect these rights -There are 3 Social Contracts, and they cannot be covered by one general theory Vote- A member of democratic society taking advantage of their right to equal representation -Vote actually means to express one self's will or choice. Observations: 1- A democratic society's difference is actually that it mostly follows the principle of democracy, otherwise, it would be called an ideal democracy if it followed democracy exactly. 2- There are many democratic societies in the world, just no ideal democracies. Value- Democracy outweighs safety because it is explicitly mentioned in the resolution. Also, in order for a democratic society to take place, there must be the idea of democracy. Value Criterion- The Neg. uses a vague Value Criterion because there are very different Social Contract Theorems, from different people such as Hobbs, Rousseau, and Locke. The use of the general Social Contract Theory means that I can sink the Value Criterion, as well as his first contention together as long as I prove that the Social Contract supports the Aff. C1- My oppponnt states, "Felons have violated the Social Contract" In fact, John Locke's Social Contract Theory states that a felon is still within the Social Contract if he commits a felony and is punished for it. The only way he would break the Social Contract would be if he broke the law and then ran away. Thus, since the term felon means that the person has already been punished, the felon has not broken the Social Contract and can maintain the right to vote. Thus, I have proven that his first contention is false, but also that his VC actually supports the Aff. C2- "…leave them with the ability to influence how we run our lives. " There is a logical flaw, because regardless of the voting of the felons, the choice that the most people like will still be chosen, which shows that the people themselves have the dominant influence on how run their own lives, not the felons. -Also, the democratic society cannot just take away rights for no reason. When the society decides to take away the right of life and liberty it is only to protect the people. Furthermore, the right to life and liberty is not mentioned in the resolution, contrary to what the Neg. says, nor in the definition because the definition is not a dictionary definition, but rather a made-up one. -Finally, the Neg. says "It also upholds the Social Contract". If this contention were true, then it would be helping the Aff. side out anyway, because I have proven that the Social Contract actually helps the Aff. To defend my case: Definitions: I have defended my definition, and attacked the contradicting definitions of my opponent, and have shown that my definitions are correct. Value: I have showed how democracy outweighs safety above. VC: Equality as a value criterion should still stand. My opponent's only attack is that felons are not equal because they committed a felony: This is not true; nowhere does it state that a felon is not equal to other citizens; there is no proof. Furthermore, again in the Declaration of Independence, it states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal". Thus my value criterion stands, and my opponent's value criterion also helps me out. Contentions: My opponent claims that eh United States is not a democratic society. That is not true- The US may not be an ideal democracy, but it is still democratic, as is uses the ideas of democracy, and it is a society, according to my opponent's definition of a society. C1: Not truly attacked C2: There are still statistics to prove that poorer people will commit more crimes out of poverty and desperation, and they will lose their rights because they tried to feed their families. For example: A father of 5 has a job, but does not make enough money to feed his family, even with the social welfare checks. One day, his children are starving and he decides to steal some bread. He gets caught and is charged with burglary, a felony. Is it really fair to deny him the right to vote because he needed food for his family? C3-C4: My opponent has also not truly attacked these contentions yet. Thanks for a good debate, and best of luck. With these arguments, I urge you to vote for the Negative.