The World V. Santa Claus

Compliance of Debate RulesLet me address Pro’s call to strip my conduct point. Pro stated Santa must live at the ‘North Pole’, and he was not specific about a magnetic North Pole, a terrestrial North Pole, a workshop by the name of North Pole, or some combination thereof. I chose the third option. According to my source: Located in the Arctic Circle, the Santa Claus Village is now renowned as Santa’s official “North Pole” residence and is one of the top tourist destinations in Finland with thousands of tourists flocking to meet Santa each year. [5] Am I in violation? I plead “not guilty”. That being said, this trial is about Santa - Let us get to his defense. PETA V. Santa Claus Round 1: [a]Cocaine smuggling Yeti: The Defense moves the evidence from the “Elve that wanted to be a dentist” and “Blitzen” be stricken from the record (unless the prosecution is attempting to sue a dead man). They state Santa was murdered, and Pro must accept all of their evidence, or none. Santa is either dead and beyond prosecution, or Santa is innocent. My client assures me he is very much alive, therefore, I maintain my client is innocent. [b]Legless Comet Pro’s video shows Santa attempting to save a little boy trapped in a well, and if it weren’t for Santa's decision to stop, the little boy probably would have died. The prosecution’s evidence also shows Santa attempting to stop Comet from his ill-conceived actions (to no avail), and Santa played no part in the grenade being lobbed into the well by the other reindeer. This tragic event has deeply saddened Santa, but his decision to render assistance allowed for the child to be saved. Comet and the other reindeer involved have faced consequences of their own desicions. [c] Yankovic’s testimony According to the Yankovis testimony, Santa is in Jail. If Pro is pursuing a criminal case against Santa for actions he has already been prosecuted for, then that is 'double jeopardy' and invalid. If Pro is pursuing a civil case, then Pro will need to establish damages suffered by PETA. Defense appeals for dismissal in either case. Round 2: [d] Elf training video First off, unless Pro is asserting elves are animals (and not children - see CPS/OSHA argument r1 [b]), I am not certain how PETA has any interest in the claim. Secondly, none of the actions shown are Santa’s doing, and in fact, the training video is warning against such careless actions. [e] World War I The video made me laugh, thanks for that! As seen in multiple instances of Pro’s evidence, reindeer are self-aware, and as such, are capable of making their own independent decisions. Santa cannot be held responsible for reindeer using their own volition. Corporations V Santa Claus Round 1: Pro asserts Santa’s guilt, but provides no evidence of “pattoned” (patent) violations. Round 2: Once again, the prosecution fails to meet its burden. Pro provides no evidence of Santa violating patents of any corporations. Per the debate rules, no new arguments can be introduced in round 4. Therefore, I move this lawsuit be dismissed. CPS and OSHA V Santa Claus Round 1: [a] Jaiden This is not a case of abuse, but of self-defense. Jaiden’s mother mistook Santa for a burglar on Christmas Eve, and Santa was forced to defend himself. When Santa went to break the news to Jaiden, he was again forced to defend himself when Jaiden went for a weapon. Santa is beside himself with grief. [b] Elves are children? Pro makes the assertion Santa’s elves are actually kidnapped children, and he forces them to work day and night 364 days a year. This is a very serious allegation, and the prosecution has provided only assertions. [c]Sexual predation/discrimination There are many allegations here. Let me address them directly and concisely: 1. Santa does not visit Jewish families out of respect for their religious views. 2. Santa ensures poor children get presents too [5], but unfortunately, some parents/legal guardians steal these gifts and cover their actions with poor replacement gifts and lies. Santa has no control over the actions of parents. 3. Billy and Sally were given gifts from their rich parents in Santa’s name. Santa has no control over the actions of parents. 4. As I covered in round 2, Santa relies on the help of parents and volunteers since Santa can only be in one place at a time. He employs impersonators to interact with children in the malls and other gatherings. It has recently come to his attention some impersonators are acting inappropriately. Santa acknowledges his screening process for volunteers needs to be more stringent, and he is in the process of implementing appropriate measures. However, he can in no way be held accountable for the actions these individuals have done while pretending to be Santa. These individuals will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Round 2: [d]Elf training video (OSHA) Santa’s workshop is not located in the US, and OSHA has no jurisdiction in the North Pole. However, to address prosecution’s concerns, Santa has developed this training video in an effort to educate his elves. “An uneducated elf is a danger to himself and those around him”, is one of Santa's workplace motto's. [5]