[eDebate] First amendment topic?

[matt stannard]

I love Joe Patrice, I love the topic committee, etc. but...

Requiring affs to curtail first amendments rights is absurd even if you 
narrow it down to the most objectionable and repugnant manifestations of 
free expression.  The aff is not going to find any literature that says 
curtailing one form of expression WON'T undermine free expression as a whole 
(some defense is impossible to find in the lit, and even if you did, it 
would only be defense, impossible to win against terminal impacts to free 
expression).  Joe even admits that the neg gets all generic "first amendment 
good" literature.  And last I checked, didn't we agree that the negative is 
winning a whole bunch more debates already these days?

I would eagerly choose the side of defending pornography (and reading 
feminist and other radical literature to do so) against the unscientific and 
reactionary arguments of the Dworkinites.  Perhaps those who think Dworkin 
won that argument or even held her own in the debate should read some 
evidence that's newer than 10-15 years old.  This debate has been settled 
but not in the direction Joe apparently leans.  Check out how Canada used a 
McKinnon-inspired anti-porn law to shut down a women's collective bookstore.

Which leaves a couple of cases...cross burning and government corruption.  
Wow.  Fun year.

stannard