Affirmative

I Affirm the resolution

Resolved: Civil disobedience in a democracy is morally justified

In order to further clarify the round I offer the following definitions

Civil Disobedience- According to Black's Law dictionary Civil Disobedience is A deliberate but
nonviolent act of lawbreaking to call attention to a particular law or set of laws of questionable
legitimacy or morality
Civil Disorder- Is defined by Title 18 U.S. code section 232 (18 U.S. Code 232) as any public
disturbance involving acts of violence by assemblages of three or more persons, which causes an
immediate danger of or results in damage or injury to the property or person of any other individual.
Rule of Law- According to the American Bar Association rule of law is both A system of selfgovernment in which all persons, including the government, are accountable under the law and a fair,
robust, and accessible legal process in which rights and responsibilities based in law are evenly enforced

Value- My value for the round is morality which is inherently valued by the question within the
resolution
Criterion- My criterion for the round is Protection of Rights, morality requires that human rights are
protected by humanity

Contention I: Civil Disobedience is required for

Protection of Minorities
Sub A.
Some citizens must express themselves through civil disobedience to be heard.
According to Elias Berg [ Democracy and the Majority Principle: A Study in Twelve
Contemporary Political Theories, 1965, p. 27-28.]
It is true that the use of the majority principle implies a formal right to express a preference on
the issues to be decided; to that extent, it implies the legitimacy of opposition. Yet as we have
seen above, majority decisions may be regarded as ipso facto 'right' and thereby, once they
have been made, as sacrosanct and exempt from criticism. The use of the majority principle
is therefore compatible with a majority dictatorship in which the minority's formal right of
opposition is only of temporary duration. Moreover, even if all the citizens have the right to
criticize as well as to take part in the making of decisions, some citizens may be permanently in
the minority and may be constantly overruled by a majority refusing to make any concessions to
their demands; the use of the majority principle does not necessarily preclude majority tyranny."
as harmless and permissible or be regarded as obstructive and thereby as illegitimate.
Oppression by the majority prevents the minority, to uphold their positive rights to democratic
government as implied by the social contract
Sub B.
Historically minorities have have attempted to use democratic processes to change their society but
have been ignored.
[miorities] had tried petitioning, lobbying, writing letters, going to court, voting for candidates that
represented their interests, legal protest, and still their views were ignored. as a result
demonstrations, such as acts of civil disobedience such as sit ins, blockades, tree sits and forest
occupations, have emerged in the last decade, prompted by the continuing mass clearcuts and destruction
of the forest ecosystem and widespread environmental consequences.

Contention II: Civil disobedience is effective in

creating government changes
Sub A.
Civil disobedience increases visibility of laws
Democratic systems, while adhering to citizens require forceful methodologies for individuals to be able
to show their displeasure with laws
According to Karen M. Gebbia-Pinetti [Statutory Interpretation, Democratic Legitimacy and
Legal-System Values, Seton Hall Legislative Journal, v. 21, 1997, p. 240-42.]
A legal system will be good, just, fair,
or workable only if it structures societal relations and resolves disputes well enough to earn the
respect and adherence of the public and, thereby, to prevent societal collapse. Throughout history, and across legal systems, theorists have employed similar,
Law is the foundational mechanism of social interaction and the reflection of how a society organizes itself.

functional meta-principles as criteria by which to measure how well law accomplishes these tasks. These criteria, which I term legal-system values, are that law [must] be predictable,

responsive to changes in society and in societal

values, influential in fostering individual and societal growth and shaping values or morals, and fair and just in individual cases.
replicable, vertically coherent across time, horizontally coherent across related areas of law,

Sub B.
Civil disobedience brings about positive regime changes
According to Paul F. Power [Civil Disobedience as Functional Opposition, The Journal of Politics,
Vol. 34, No. 1 (February, 1972), 45.]
Civil disobedience may be of possible utility to conventional oppositional groups in several

Civil disobedience communicates to other opponents demands that they were unaware of or
that they may have agreed to overlookeither among themselves or with that regime . (2) A conceivable result of
(1) is that one or more of the opponents becomes uncomfortable and begins to perform an adversary role
with the regime. (3) On the assumption that oppositions are already acting as adversaries against the regime, civil disobedience causes them to enter a tac it or express coalition
among themselves, thereby increasing their combined adversary power over the sum of their previous, individual strengths. (4) Civil disobedience pluralizes a
highly unified,oppositional patterna functional benefit if this kind of result is conducive to
oppositional effectiveness vis vis the regime . (5) Civil disobedience provokes conventional opponents of the regime to reexamine their constituency
ways: (1)

bases to determine how they have failed to represent those dissenters who have chosen rule breaking over ordinary means of criticism; it compels them to take remedial action to regain the
sympathy and voting power of these dissenters and

My Third Contention is that

It is morally right to stand up against unjust laws.
Sub A.
Laws can be oppressive to a society
According to Joseph Raz, [Professor of the Philosophy of Law at Columbia Law School, 2003 About
Morality And The Nature Of Law. The American Journal of Jurisprudence. 48 Am. J. Juris.]
The fact that the general duty to obey may depend on systemic features of the law does not, of
course, show that it is compatible with a proper conception of how evil the law can be, and of how
much injustice and oppression, etc., it may cause. It is unlikely that the systemic moral qualities of
the law are entirely independent of, entirely unaffected by, the moral qualities of the content of the
law, that is, of the moral content of the laws which constitute it. How are we, then,to assess the claim
that there is a general obligation to obey?
Sub B.
It is the moral duty of the citizen to overthrow unjust governments
According to Marjorie E. Kornhauser [Professor of Law Tulane Law School, Fall, 2002 The Role Of Tax
Protests And Anti-Tax Rhetoric In America. Buffalo Law Review, 50 Buffalo L. Rev. 819]
Legitimacy And The Right Of Revolution: an honored tradition in the United States dating back to
Colonial times, because it recognizes that even in a democracy, the state's sovereignty is bound by the
moral authority of the individual, who is morally obligated to resist immoral laws. n112 This
resistance does not necessarily lead to violence, and in fact most people who believe and practice
civil disobedience do not advocate violence. n113 Yet it is a potential consequence of civil
disobedience, and indeed it occurred during the civil rights movement.
If huma