Border Defence

>I am going to write out my case in the traditional LD format. My opponent may do the same or just type out her arguments as he pleases. I am assuming that I have chosen the correct side of this debate. >Angelina Jolie once said that "[She is] the kind of person who doesn't recognize borders. [She doesn't] understand why we think it is okay to keep someone within one border when they are unable to feed their family when they could be getting help somewhere else. [She doesn't] see people as different so I don't understand the idea of borders in this world. " I agree with her and it is because I think freedom is essential in international affairs that I negate the resolution: :: Negated :: The US should have a border fence >For clarification during this debate I would like to offer the following definition: Freedom: the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint >I would like to offer the following observation: My opponent has the burden of proof to prove why we should have a border fence. If she fails to do this then CON will in this debate. :: Value :: >My value is freedom. Freedom is a global and national concept involving the abilities and liberty of the people. Without freedom no society functions or survives thus making freedom internationally valued. In this debate the freedom at question is whether or not individuals outside of the US should have the ability to find and maintain an occupation inside the borders of the US. :: Value Criterion :: >My value criterion is equality. Equality is practiced worldwide and is definitely necessary to maintain societies. I vouch for equality in this debate because I believe that all individuals, no matter what their ethnicity, background, or residency should have the same ability to find a job and maintain it in the US. To win this debate my opponent must prove that these individuals outside of the US do not deserve equality to those inside it. :: Contention 1 :: >My first contention is that all individuals deserve the same chances to get a job. There is no conceivable reason that an immigrant would be worth less than a person already living in the United States. This is because of the following: 1. Immigrants and citizens of the US are all people 2. No people deserve more rights than other people Due to this logic there is no reason that the immigrant community is worth any less than the American community. :: Contention 2 :: >My second contention is that illegal immigrants are in need of the job opportunities that exist in the US. My opponent neglects the fact that illegal immigrants come to the US for a REASON. This reason is to survive which they believe (and they are correct) they can achieve by getting a job in the US. According to a Press Briefing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform by Joel Kaplan the economy (and job market) are "the magnet for illegal immigration. " The economy and job market in Mexico are decimated so these people which we speak of are forced to travel to the US, the closest country with a decent job market. :: Contention 3 :: >My third contention is that a lack of illegal immigrants would devastate the US economy. An overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants which come to the US live in California and Texas (. http://www.statemaster.com......). These numbers were as of the 2,000 census and are greater at the present. If these millions of immigrants in the work forces of these states were not in the US then the economy of these states would be devastated. >I eagerly look forward to the response of my esteemed opponent.