|
|
Posted by Richard Hirth on January 26, 19102 at 03:11:33:
In Reply to: question about a debate topic posted by Michele Lee on December 06, 19101 at 10:52:06:
Aff
If laws are being used for other purposes than what they’re intended for then those laws are useless. It is because I agree with this I must Affirm today’s resolution. Resolved: When in conflict the spirit of the law should supercede the letter of the law.
Conflict- a clash (American Heritage College Dictionary)
Should-used to express obligation or duty
Spirit of the law- the General meaning or purpose of the law(Black’s Law)
Letter of the law- Literal content, the strictly literal meaning of the law rather than the intention or policy behind it
Supercede-to take the place of
My Core Value for this debate will Societal Welfare.
My Value Criteria will be Quality of Life
Quality of life is the ranking or evaluation of a condition of existence in comparison to others in a similar social or civil position. Or in reference to this resolution. How using a law for what it’s meant for will give the people the best quality in their life and there for with the best quality the best welfare for the society will follow right behind.
Contention 1 Spirit of the law will adhere to the needs of each individual person
Sub Point A. The Spirit of the law can change instantly to best meet the needs of a person unlike the letter of the law. With the spirit of the law able to adapt instantly to best meet the needs of the person then quality of life is enhanced on an individual basis and with individual needs met societal welfare improves.
Sub Point B. The spirit of the law is only looked at when in conflict with the letter of the law. We are not looking at cases where the letter and the spirit coincide which is most of the time. We are only looking at times when they clash. Ultimately the spirit gives a law enforcer the flexibility to choose a better route if there be one. If theres not a better way to handle a situation then the spirit and the law coincide and that’s not what were debating here. For example I would like to talk about the forced abortions in China. If a couple had reached their limit for children and the wife was pregnant again. The law said that, that couple will have to abort that Baby. The husband becomes lucky and gets granted permission for him and his family to move to the US on business for China. A week before they move the wife goes into premature labor and because of the Chinese law the baby has to be aborted but hopefully a Chinese official realizes that the spirit of that law was to keep the Chinese population in check and knows that this new baby will only affect the US’s population and decides to let the baby live because the actual words of the law don’t necessarily apply in this case. That official knew what the spirit of the law was and decided for the benefit of that family that the spirit differed from the actual words and he saved a life. This is an example of how the spirit of the law only differs when it is helpful to the quality of life.
Contention 2 Laws should only be used for what they were intended to be used for
Contention 3 The Spirit of the law can change to meet each individuals instant needs