Summary:
Debate-style arguments, in both the affirmative and the negative, on the resolution that individual claims of privacy ought to be valued above competing claims of societal welfare. The affirmative argues that privacy is both at the basis of our constitutional values and the underlining factor behind several of our amendments, and that privacy is essential to both societal welfare and societal functioning and performance. The negative argues that no security can exist without some intrusion of privacy, and that individual privacy is negligent when compared to the welfare of an entire society.
Affirmative Speech:
English poet, John Dryden once stated that "For who can be secure of private right, If sovereign sway may dissolv'd by might? Nor is the people's judgment always true: The most may err as grossly as the few." In just a few sentences Dryden encompasses all the doubts and fears of a person's private interests versus those of the overwhelming public. Societal welfare is two words that are not easily defined, not because of the difficulty of its content but because of the vastness to which it may apply. At times it may be nearly impossible to see the clear and best path for one's people and if the price is one person's rights, in my belief the stakes themselves may be too high.
I am here today to affirm this month's resolution which.....
This is a free excerpt of 135 words. There are 1,657 words (approx.
6 pages at 300 words per page) in the full essay.
Read the rest of this Essay with our Debate on the Government Invading a Citizen's Privacy Access Pass.
