the handicapped should not be eligible to recieve any benefits from the government, and/or society

" I would like to highlight that my opponent stated "disabled people's refusal to live life to its fullest extent available" Disabled people don't "refuse" to live life to its full extent" They (the ones accepting the checks, fortunately not all of them) refuse to attempt to live in their own right. That is the fullest extent available. "How does the "common man" benefit from this? Disability checks allow disabled people to participate in the economy. They can use them in proactive ways (i.e. to help pay for college, invest in the stock market, and pay taxes). A disability check helps to ensure that the disabled, can participate and play an active role in the economy." Student loans permit disabled people to go to college. Disability checks only screw up the market mechanism of figuring out whether that cost will be exceeded by the benefits the disabled person they create, making it less likely to be true. " In response to my opponent's contention regarding life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The three aspects of this phrase are considered to be among the "inalienable rights of man". My opponent is correct, in saying that a man has every right to spend his money how he sees fit, which is why he is not forced to donate his earnings to charity. Disability checks, however, function similarly to social security." This is not a defense. Social security is no more moral than disability checks. You have conceded that a man has every right to spend his money how he sees fits, which means you concede the argument in regards to disability checks, which violate this right. "The reason why these funds are taken involuntarily, is to ensure economic stability for people that can't work." And the reason burglars visit my house is to ensure economic stability when they can't work. No one has a right to maintain economic stability at the expense of the only one who actually earned that particular piece of economic stability. Do note that inabilities to work are often caused by various laws that raise the costs of hiring. " SSDI is provided upon the basis of need." This is not a defense. Need is not a rightful claim to a slave. " The government, in order to avoid giving funds to undeserving recipients require a lengthy history of background information." It cannot possibly avoid giving money to "undeserving" recipients except by avoiding giving money. To "deserve" money is to have created a value to exchange for it. Anyone who has not created such a value and will not create a value in the future that exceeds that amount plus time value plus risk plus whatever value is added by competing demand for credit is automatically "Undeserving." " The housing I was referencing in the previous round is a public institution" I.e. forcible extortion. " My opponent clearly doesn't understand that the United states is ensuring its sovereignty by providing these services. If the government were to discontinue such services, the welfare of our nation and its people would be at stake." The welfare of YOU and people like YOU perhaps, those of you incapable of overcoming these problems on your own. The nation as a whole, no. In fact, the rest of us would have one less thing to worry about. "The main purpose of a democratic government such as ours, is to provide representation for the people." There is no such entity as "the people." Democracy is not an excuse for theft, it's merely a structure that commonly results from too many parties pursuing power. "It has shown overwhelming bipartisan support." Bipartisan support is not what is needed to justify taking money from everyone. Unanimous support of all 300 million americans is what is needed to justify taking money from everyone. Nothing less will suffice. "This money allows them to pursue their own semblance of happiness" Those who can pursue happiness should never be sacrificed for some incompetent's semblance of it. "The pursuit of happiness relies, upon more than money, you are correct, but your requirements are purely personal opinions that cannot be proven." You're saying it's possible to be happy, i.e., approve of one's life, without approving of oneself? Or possible to approve of oneself when oneself is an incompetent parasite who destroys other people's lives in the name of his "needs"? Which of these two are you affirming? "Ah, my my apologies, all post-secondary institutions that receive money from the state (public universities) must comply with that. Although most private schools recognize it. Colleges aren't left up to the "whim of the government", they are (as it has always been) of servitude to the student. The student is the one that chooses whether or not to divulge and have consideration paid to their disability." This does not alter that the state decides what constitutes a disability, how much of whose life will be sacrificed to pay for it, etc. Oddly enough, a teacher once tried to convince me to apply for disability accommodations. For numerous reasons I told them to bugger off, though in more diplomatic terms :). " I don't think you have a true understanding of how expensive it is to be disabled. The wheelchair that I sit in as I type this is a six-thousand dollar piece of equipment. What if I don' t have six thousand dollars to my name? Should I be left to crawl around in the streets, unable to work?" Yes. Just as someone else who hasn't earned other means of transport for themselves must crawl. The fact that some people have an easier time walking than others does not justify theft by those others. One does not earn things by having a difficult path to tread, one earns things by producing them or things that someone will exchange them for. " I ask the voters to simply think. What I am proposing isn't immoral." You conceded that point when you conceded that I had a right to spend my money, irrespective of government demands. "I was born into a situation out of my control. I will never be free of it, but I will assure you that my intention is never to take more than I deserve." Too late, intentions or no. "And sometimes, I need help." Then ask more sympathetic people for it, or earn it. Working is more moral, even begging is more moral, than lobbying a government to continue programs of theft. "I will hopefully never have to collect a disability check, but I know people that, will need it to succeed. " No one needs a disability check to succeed, because needing a disability check is proof that one has already lost. Just like a company needing a bailout is proof that they've lost. " I urge a strong vote in negation of this resolution, for the sake of those that need help in pursuing happiness." I urge a vote on a similar ground-- a vote for the sake of those who can pursue happiness-- if only the government stops attacking them in the name of helping others.