Prepared: THW deplore negotiating with terrorists. [OPP]

Impromptu: THW not allow women who have had plastic surgery to take part in beauty pageants. [or smth][PROP]

Semi-Finals: THW allow the use of performance-enhancing drugs in professional sports
>ChungChengHigh[Yishun] was prop, St.Joseph'sInstitute Opp.
>There isn't much I can say about this; I didn't track this debate
>The prop had a strange policy though. They only allow the use of drugs in trainings and trials but not competitions.
>The opp should have rebutted it right out, but they didn't and stuck to their prepared substantive points.
>One thing that really irked me was, athlete [ath-leet] was either a-the-leet or a-the-leek. It was killer, I say! [sorry, I'm a purist for English] and i thought of something so, erm, horny, which I think is unsuitable for this blog, incase the phrase corrupts people's minds.
>The opp won, St.Joseph's

Finals: THBT repeat sex offenders should be incarcerated for life
>DAMN FUNNY SIA! LIKE SLAP IN THE FACE
>Prop: SJI, Opp: Xinmin
>The prop began, as usual. Daniel [whom Carissa asked for his number] talked about:
>Definition: sex offenders: people older than legal age who violate one or more minorities under the legal age
>2tiers: emotional, physical trauma [This kept showing up in the debate, I was so frustrated my eyebrows went MAD. Literally.]
>To criminals who have gone though extensive counselling but are still unrepentant
>100 000 people raped in USA [HUH?! I was thinking. That's rather exaggerated. But I guess it's pretty close, America is a big country.]

>Here come the fun part.
>Opp2 declared: "Yes, we agree that the sex offenders are unpardonable, that's why we demand a harsher punishment: the DEATH PENALTY."

IT WAS LIKE, HUH?! THROUGHOUT THE ROOM. PEOPLE WERE LIKE, MAKING NOISES OF SHOCK, WTH SO FUNNY AND UNEXPECTED

>and so, the parallel cases started. SJI was having a REALLY unlucky day.
>the prop was really frustrating. I think they're really inflexible, they made it seem like a minor rebuttal and stuck to their case. "That's just an easy way out!" They just continued on to their substantives:
>remove risk of threat; more girl and guys violated
>Threat to the criminal; knowing you would be incar.ed then would not commit the crime [I was all, HUH?! WHAT IN HELL? THIS WOULD ONLY HELP THEIR CASE, NOT YOURS]

I thought they might bend to neccessity and talk about how death is too harsh. Later on, they talked so much about deterrence the other points became, like, redundant. Government resources? Social backlash?

>Opp2: Criminals would fear death
>No threat of repeat: once hanged, they will not revive and starting raping innocent young children.
>Pay back grievances to traumatised family & victim

>Prop3: Death occurs the whole time, loss of loved one is an inevitable part of life. And something about, it's better of they tke it in their stride. [I was all, WTH, DO YOU MEAN YOU ENCOURAGE RAPINGS SO THE FAMILY CAN LEARN TO COPE WITH TRAUMA?] Maybe the phrasing was a little off, but even so, it's not exactly valid.
>Not having a life is worse than death, let 'em suffer the way their victims did. [At first I was gaping. Are they saying we should get someone to rape them? No pun intended, but to me that's what it sounded like.]
>I liked the second point. It at least shows that the prop is fighting back, adressing the opp proper instead of ignoring them and sticking to their written cue cards.
>Replies was okay, just fine.
>It was a close call, but SJI won. It was damn funny, seeing their faces! They were all, SHOCK.

Personally, I feel that Xinmin should have won, even though they did not phrase the EXTREMELY good point so as to attack the prop directly.

It's such a pity you all left...