Lincoln Douglas Constructive Speech Outline – CREATE A SCRIPT
State this sentence exactly as written, except substitute affirm or negative
1. I affirm/negate the resolution which states, Resolved: The New Deal has proven that the government is
morally obligated to be actively involved in the welfare of its citizens.
Define as many words as needed – most times, negative construct does not need definitions unless there is a disagreement.
2.
To clarify today’s debate, I offer the following definitions from [name source]:

Word – Definitions

Word – Definition
Choose a value and reason from the follow list. (If you want,
you can choose one on your own, but get it approved).
3.
The value for today’s debate will be:
 Morality  this is important because it creates a particular system of values and principles of
conduct, especially in a society. This ties to the resolution because without morality, a society has
no foundation to function.

Human dignity  this is important because every person has value, are worthy of great respect and
must be free from slavery, manipulation and exploitation. This ties to the resolution because without
human dignity, citizens cannot function properly in a society.

Freedom  this is important because it is essential to a decent life and through which people can
obtain dignity and/or self-actualization. This ties to the resolution because freedom is necessary to
make proper choices in life. Without the help and aid that a government would give, freedom to
make proper choices cannot be achieved.

The common good  this is important because it must be honored for people to get to a state of
peace. This ties to the resolution because in achieving peace, citizens will have the optimal
opportunity serving in their own welfare.

Sanctity of life  this is important because if we do not value or have this, it renders everything else
in life worthless. This ties to the resolution because citizens are needed to make a society work. If
those citizens do not value sanctity of life, they cannot function.
Explain HOW you will achieve the value (action words) and why is it important (often based in philosophy).
4. The value of _________________ will be achieve by
important because
This is
Think of contentions as your paragraphs. Each contention must include a MEAL. You need to tell your
opponent how many contentions you will present (usually 2-3).
5. We will offer
contentions to prove the resolution to be true/false.
 Contention 1
o CLAIM/MAIN IDEA
o EVIDENCE
o ANALYSIS/IMPACT – Why it matters in your own words
o LINK – connect to value and reason
 Contention 2: Rinse and Repeat until you have filled your speaking time
[SUM UP WHAT YOU JUST SAID AND THEN] Therefore, you should affirm/negate. Thank you.
Lincoln Douglas REBUTTAL Speech Outline
You must mention how you will start the rebuttal.
1. Today, I will address the affirmative/negatives points before/after mine. It will start with the affirmative
then address the negative OR start with the negative then address the affirmative. [choose one]
Start your rebuttal. It will mirror how you built your contentions, using MEAL. You need to explain to
the judge(s) why/how your opponents’ case is false or weak and why yours is better.
2. We will offer the following rebuttals to prove my opponents’ case to be false/weak/etc.
 Rebuttal of Contention 1
o IDENTIFY CONTENTION
o EVIDENCE TO DISPROVE OPPONENT
o ANALYSIS/IMPACT – Why it is false
o LINK – explain how it does not support the value and reason
 Rebuttal of Contention 2: Rinse and Repeat until you have filled your speaking time
OR
2. We will further expand on our contentions to prove why our case upholds our value the best.
 Expansion of Contention 1
o IDENTIFY CONTENTION
o EVIDENCE TO REFUTE ANY REBUTTAL FROM OPPONENT
o ANALYSIS/IMPACT – Why it further impacts the contention
o LINK – connect to how it supports the value and reason
 Expansion of Contention 2: Rinse and Repeat until you have filled your speaking time
1.
AFFIRMATIVE CONSTRUCT EXAMPLE:
I affirm the resolution Resolved: Capital Punishment is Justified.
2.
I offer the following definitions from Black’s Law Dictionary 1991.
Capital Punishment-Punishment by death for capital crimes
Justifiable- Rightful; defensible; warranted or sanctioned by law; that which can be shown to be
sustained by law
3.
My value today is social justice. In order to provide the absolute good to a society, the government must
pursue justice.
Morton Kaplan Justice, Human Nature, and Political Obligation 1976explains,
” …the idea of injustice is closely associated with reactions to the disappointment of existing
expectations. Hence justice …can have strong conservative implications in that it seeks to sustain the
status quo in society against destructive and disorderly intrusions. Justice is often taken to mean keeping
within the rules of established social relationships.” In order to maintain social justice, individuals must
be punished for “disappointing their expectations.”
The satisfaction of justice encompasses all other values because it provides a society where individuals
can exercise their rights and liberties for the betterment of all. We satisfy social justice through capital
punishment because it takes away that which has violated society’s status quo against disorderly
intrusions.
4.
In order to weigh the importance of Social justice, we must use the Doctrine of Rights Forfeiture.
Within a society, individual’s put themselves under an obligation to respect other individuals within
society. When these relationships are respected, the government protects rights and preserves social
justice. If relationships are damaged, the violator must forfeit a comparable amount of rights as are
taken.
David Ross The Right and The Good explains
“Once a person has violated the rights of another, the violator forfeits similar rights of his own. [Ross
says.] “the main element in anyone’s right of life or liberty or property is extinguished by his failure to
respect the corresponding right in others.”
In short, the punishment to serve justice requires that the criminal forfeit a corresponding amount of
rights.
5.
My first contention states Capital punishment preserves societal justice. When an individual violates the
law, they have abused rights and have adopted rights that they do not have a claim to. In violation of these
rights, the state is justified in punishing a criminal for the severity of the crime. In order to ensure an
adequate punishment is received, the state must take away the parallel rights of the criminal.
Jeffery Murphy Law. Morality and Rights 1983 says,
“The criminal, who as a rational person could see that even he derived benefits from participation in a
community of law, could be regarded as rationally willing (though not empirically desiring) his own
punishment. This being so, he deserves it in the sense that he has a right to it. It is important to see that
this theory grounds punishment on justice or fairness (i.e. justice demands that we have the right to
inflict, that the criminal has the right to receive) not on utility. The basic principle is that no person
should profit from his own wrongdoing, and retribution keeps this from happening. If a person
does profit from his own wrongdoing, from his disobedience, this is unfair or unjust, not merely to his
victim, but to all members of the community who have been obedient- one reason why crime is an
offense against the state.”
Because capital crimes are the gravest in crimes, the state must not only punish adequately for the crime,
but must make sure that the punishment is not an increase in the criminal’s quality of life. By executing
its most sever criminal, the state takes away the abuse of self-rule and prevents that individual from ever
causing a perpetuation of rights violations.
Donald Atwell Zoll, Professor of Political Science at Arizona State University says,
“Capital punishment is a…necessary, if limited, factor in that maintenance of social tranquility and
ought to be retained on this ground. To do otherwise is to indulge in the luxury of permitting a sense of
false delicacy to reign over the necessity of social survival.”
If we chose not to punish by death for capital crimes, criminals would end up living a more plentiful life
than did the victims of the crime, and does not set the moral denunciation of wrong of crimes against the
state. Capital punishment preserves social justice because it morally denounces the crime and provides a
restitution for the wrong done. Only by forfeiting their own lives can capital criminals adequately
compensate for the wrong done to the rest of society. When criminals have forfeited their rights
that have damaged the society, then social order is restored and is again allowed to flourish.
5.1. My second contention states the state is justified to punish by death for capital crimes. When we enter
into society, we give up some rights for the protection of others. It is the governments obligation to protect these
rights and when an individual violates the reciprocal obligation that exists between themselves and the state,
they have waged war upon the society.
Robert E. Crowe The Forum February 1925 says,
“The man who kills is society’s greatest enemy. He has set up his own law. He is an anarchist- the foe of
all civilized government. If anarchy is not to be met with anarchy, it must be met by the laws, and these
laws must be enforced.”
When a criminal commits a capital crime they have waged war on society.
Because an obligation rests upon the government to protect its citizens, the state is justified in fighting
back in order to preserve justice.
Jeffery Reiman, Philosopby of Punishment 1988 explains,
“Since we take as justified the killing of innocent people (say, homicidal maniacs) in self-defense (when
it is necessary to preserve the lives of innocent victims), then it seems that we must take as justified the
killing of guilty people if it is necessary to preserve the lives of innocent victims …it is a form of social
defense-reason would seem to dictate that if killing is justified when necessary for self-defense, then it is
justified
when necessary for social defense.”
I
In order to protect the rest of society against abuses by an individual, the government is justified in
ridding society of a dangerous criminal. Those convicts who have waged war on society have caused a
disorderly intrusion that needs to be corrected.
SUMMARY: Capital punishment corrects this intrusion through rights forfeiture. When Drug
Lords, Terrorists, and premeditated murderers wage war upon the state, the state is has an obligation to take a
comparable amount of rights so that our society can again prosper.
1.
NEGATIVE CONSTRUCT EXAMPLE:
I negate the resolution Resolved: Capital Punishment is Justified.
2.
DEFINITIONS ARE SKIPPED BECAUSE THERE IS AGREEMENT
3. My value today is Dignity. Dignity is the aspect of humanity that separates us from the animal kingdom. It
is something we innately possess by virtue of being a human.
Jonathan M. Mann The Western Journal of Medicine (CA Medical Association) 1998 exclaims,
“Enormous personal and societal energy is invested in protecting and preserving individual and
collective dignity. Those of us who live in generally dignity-affirming circumstances react when our
dignity is violated. Even briefly recalling such an instance evokes strong feelings of shame, humiliation,
disgust, anger, and sadness. How then must well-being be affected by repeated and sustained
violations!”
Because our dignity exists separate of our rights, it cannot be taken away by the state. When a person
commits a crime, the government only has the power to take a individual’s right, not their dignity.
Capital Punishment is therefore not justified because it takes away from human dignity.
4.
To weigh the importance of Dignity, we must use the Ends/Means Theory. The ends do not justify the
means if the means are not moral.
Mortimer J. Adler Aristotle for Everybody 1978 says, ” …human beings always act with some end in
view. The thinking they do in order to act purposefully begins with thinking about the goal to be
achieved, but when they begin to do anything to achieve that goal, they have to start with the means
for achieving it.”
Adler leads us to draw two points. First that we cannot ignore the means by which we pursue an end,
and second, we must maintain that our actions stay consistent with the principles behind them in order to
preserve justice.
5.
My first contention argues capital punishment results from unjust means. The justification of capital
punishment rests on the idea that crime will be reduced in the future. The method of punishing indefinitely
for an anticipated crime is unjust because it has acted in a way that supposes that more crimes will be
committed in the future by that individual or others. This uses man as a means, which is immoral and should
not justify the rights violations of one for the hope of a deterrent.
Additionally, capital punishment exceeds the bounds of justice because it carries a punishment too far to
the extreme.
Michael D. Bayles and Kenneth Henley, Rights Conduct: Theories and Applications (2nd edition) 1989
“As the aim of punishment is to enforce principles of justice …Only the smallest punishment needed to
ensure compliance with duties should be imposed.”
Because life in prison and capital punishment both punish for a crime and incapacitate the offender, we
are morally obligated to go with the lesser of the two punishments. Capital punishment is not justified
because it results from an ulterior motive from punishment and does not respect individual dignity in the
pursuit of justice.
5.1. My second contention maintains the end of capital punishment is not justified. The death of a human
being leaves no room for growth, change or reformation. This violates the dignity of an individual by not
allowing them to live out their life. Although every crime deserves to be punished, the purpose of
punishment is to live to learn from that mistake. Capital punishment is a hasty end, which denies the growth
of an individual.
David McCord (Professor of Law, Drake Law School) Florida Law Review, Jan. 1998 says, “One
problem with the abstract notion of eye-for-an-eye vengeance against child molesters and killers is that
this notion doesn’t consider the fact that the condemned man or woman is still a human being, and is
still capable of change and growth.”
IF TIME ALLOWS, THE REBUTTAL MAY BE STARTED NOW
SUMMARY: No matter what a person has done, they still have a claim to human dignity. Because life is
sacred no matter whose it is, the state must act in accordance of the preservation of that dignity. Capital
punishment violates the dignity of an individual and does not provide room for growth, which is essential for a
just society. It is therefore held that capital punishment is not justified.
Use this sheet for any extra notes
LD Structure
 Affirmative Constructive (AC)
 Cross-Examination (NEG questions AFF)
 Negative Constructive (NC)
 Cross-Examination (AFF questions NEG)
 1st Affirmative Rebuttal (AR1)
 1st Negative Rebuttal (NR)
 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal (AR2)
 Total Prep Time during debate
6 minutes
3 minutes
7 minutes
3 minutes
4 minutes
6 minutes
3 minutes
4 min/EACH side
Terms to Know
1. Resolution – topic of debate
2. Affirmative – in favor of topic
3. Negative – opposes topic
4. Constructive (SCRIPTED) – building of the speech

Value – what is most important in the debate (what will be achieved/protected)

Criterion – how to achieve value (sometimes based in philosophy)

Contention – major arguments
5. Rebuttal (PARTIALLY SCRIPTED) – why the other side’s contentions are wrong/your contentions are
right
6. Flow – keeping track of the debate; points, contention, and questions