We affirm the resolution today: Resolved: Birthright citizenship should be abolished in the United States.

Before we begin, we would like to offer a few observations to clarify the debate. First, because we are looking towards a moral question of ethics in American society, we would like to propose that this debate be judged on the inalienable rights outlined by our Declaration of Independence. Observation two is definitions.

Should is used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someones actions Oxford

Abolish is the act of formally doing away with a system or practice or institution Princeton

Birthright citizenshipWhen citizenship is conferred to people based on where they are born. In the context of this resolution it has to do with the practice of automatically granting citizenship to anybody born within the territorial confines of the United States. Analysis, defined as needed by U.S. Code and 14th Amendment

Citizenship -- The concept of citizenship is composed of three main elements. The first is citizenship as legal status, defined by civil, political and social rights. The second considers citizens specifically as political agents, actively participating in a society's political institutions. The third refers to citizenship as membership in a political community that furnishes a distinct source of identity. Stanford University Dictionary of Philosophy

Contention one is that birthright citizenship undermines social cohesion

Social cohesion, basically defined as the bonds that hold our society together, are threatened and strained because of birthright citizenship. While this may seem contradictory at first, it becomes quite clear after analysis. According to the Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy, If enough citizens display a robust sense of belonging to the same political community, social cohesion is obviously strengthened. However, since many other factors can impede or encourage it, social integration should be seen as an important goal that citizenship aims to achieve. As we will see, one crucial test for any conception of citizenship is whether or not it can be said to contribute to social integration. The fact is, birthright citizenship completely undermines this sense of belonging through a few key facets. First, it separates those who are natural born from those who arent, creating a classist structure. According to the Economist in 2010, The intent of the 14th amendment is to prevent the creation of second-class citizens via legal obfuscations that pretend that some of the people in the United States are not the full kind of "person" who is entitled to the rights it guarantees. What we need to see is the 14th amendment is having the inverse effect. According to Rasmussen Reports in 2011, 65% of people are against an illegal immigrant having birthright citizenship for their child. This is compounded by the amount of scathing rhetoric around our society towards minorities and illegal immigration, and this becomes a huge problem as it shows that our citizens place themselves above their fellow human beings because of where they were born, and this further will undermine citizenry

as these people no longer will feel as robust a sense of belonging. The 14th amendment no longer can fulfill its purpose, and is actually promoting a degradation of social cohesion, which was obviously never its intent. This cant be done in our society, as the impacts would be tremendous. To allow for any such system to continue in America that undermines our most inalienable rights, that is, equality for all, we would undermine not only our past ideals, but also our present through our social cohesion.

Contention 2: birthright citizenship is an antiquated system that perpetuates the undermining of American ideals Citizenship should not be just about an accident of birth. It should involve an understanding of our nations history and principles, and a commitment to these common ideals. As iterated by Harvard University in 1994, How can society tell its immigrants, minorities, and disadvantaged that, regardless of one's origins, everyone has a fair chance at success and social acceptance, when through the Constitution, it erects these bar-riers against a class of innocent children? The answer is, you simply cant. If we attempt to adopt a hypocritical framework that demeans those who arent born in America, simply because of accident of birth, we will demean our ideals as well. What makes people citizens is not where they come from, rather, it is their embracing of the most fundamental facets of liberty. President Barack Obama solidified this ideal on May 10th, 2011, when he spoke, It doesnt matter where you come from; it doesnt matter what you look like; it doesnt matter what faith you worship. What matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded; that you believe that all of us are created equal, endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. All of us deserve our freedoms and our pursuit of happiness. In embracing America, you can become American.

That is what makes this country great. That enriches all of us. There truly is no arguing with this logic. The old, antiquated systems we have undermine our most fundamental American ideals, and for what cause? One does not become a good citizen, one does not uphold our democracy, just by being born here. It is the embracing of the American ideal that should always be prioritized over some mere coincidence, some mere accident of birth. For these reasons, we must affirm the resolution.