Failure to disarm undermines the NPT Pressenza International Press Agency, March 13, 2020, The Virus of Nuclear Proliferation, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/03/12/virus-nuclear-proliferation In an avalanche of reporting we are now assaulted with information about how the world is urgently attempting to batten down the hatches to avoid the possibility of deathly consequences from the broadly publicized outbreak of the coronavirus, causing the possibility of postponing or perhaps downsizing the upcoming five year mandatory

This consolidates all of the case list information from the  Blake & Strake Jesuit tournaments.  

Standardized tests biased against minorities and discourage application to top universities Beth Hawkins, August 19, 2019, http://laschoolreport.com/big-promises-big-data-is-the-sats-new-environmental-context-score-a-tool-to-personalize-college-admissions-or-another-impersonal-data-point/, Big promises, big data: Is the SAT’s new ‘environmental context’ score a tool to personalize college admissions, or another impersonal data point? Alas, it hasn’t worked out that way. Among students who took the ACT between 2014 and 2018, just 11 percent of African Americans met at least three college-ready benchmarks. Twenty-four percent

Free registration required to read In order to establish that the benefits of GM foods outweigh the harms, Pro teams need to establish offensive reasons why GM foods are good and make defensive arguments against the Con claims that GM foods are bad. The benefits of Genetically Modified Foods I will start with the discussion of the offensive arguments – the benefits of the GMOs – and then address the

Introduction In order to win that the harms of GM foods (GMF) outweigh the benefits, Con teams will need to be able to win that GMOs are not advantageous (or at least minimize the advantages) and still win that the harms of GM foods outweigh the benefits. This essay will be divided into three parts. In the first part, I will discuss how to answer the arguments in favor of

Answering Other Arguments Majority of Scientists Good Pro teams will argue that a majority of scientists support GM foods. Good Con teams will need to be able to counter this. I suggest a few arguments. One, the majority of scientists are bought of by the GM foods industry. David H. Freedman, 2013, August 20, Freedman has been covering science, business and technology for 30 years. His most recent book, Wrong,

ARGUMENT OUTLINE   Affirmative   Advantages –   Climate change — all impacts, including ethical obligations to reduce climate change   General environmental harms to coal production General environmental harms to oil production   Coal mining destroys the environment   Environmental racism/environmental justice   Natural resource conflicts   High deficits bad   Renewables good, including economic benefits   Nuclear power good   Objectivism/libertarianism — government subsidies bad   Free trade

421 page initial file — General On creating the conditions for nuclear disarmament (2019) Related: Should the US expand and modernize its nuclear arsenal? The Millennials’ Nuclear Weapons Dilemma (2019).  When survival demands one to be unflinchingly red in tooth and claw, the logic of brutality prevails. This persuasive fact compels the development of weapons of mass destruction — nuclear, chemical, biological, etc. No religion, peace evangelist, nor holy man