Themes of motion: This house believes that criminals

deserve a happy and secure life.

 
1st speaker of the affirmative team:
I stand with the motion that believes that criminals deserve a happy and secure life.
As we all know, criminals are people who commit abominations. Even so, the fact
that they’re humans and deserve to receive human rights cannot be denied.
 
Following the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, one of the thirty articles
recognized by the United Nations states that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and
security of person. Accordingly, providing them with a happy and secure life is only
one of the acts of humanizing humans, and nothing is wrong with it.
 

1st speaker of the opposition team:

I can't entirely agree with the affirmative team. As they stated, criminals are people
who commit abominations. Some of the worst acts are killing, kidnapping, and raping.
All of the actions clearly violate human rights, so why would we humanize humans
who can’t do the same thing to others?
 
Criminals should bear the consequences of their actions. Their deeds should impact
their daily lives to remind others not to disobey the law. Giving them the life that
normal people would have will only make them underestimate the verdict.

2nd speaker of the affirmative team:

Of course, their wrongdoing is not to be forgiven easily. But as humans, they deserve
a second chance. They deserve the opportunity to prove that they can turn into better
people. Giving it an example of ourselves. If we make a mistake, we also want to be
forgiven and have a second chance, don't we? The same thing goes for them.

Criminals already bear the consequences of their actions under the applicable law.
They have carried out their sentences according to the regulations. All they need right
now is a second chance to start over and have a happy life.

2nd speaker of the opposition team:

But do they deserve a second chance? Some of what they've committed can’t be
forgiven. The people they killed can’t live anymore. The money they stole and used
can’t go back to the original owner. Even if they already followed the sentences
accorded by the law, the things they had committed can’t return to how they were.

It proves that even though they have been punished, the deeds they did still harm
other people. Again, do they really deserve a second chance?
3rd speaker of the affirmative team:
I’ll summarize the two arguments to support this motion from the affirmative team
perspective. First, criminals are also humans. They deserve to have a happy life as a
form of human rights. Second, they have been punished according to the applicable
law, and so they deserve a second chance. Even though they’ve committed bad deeds,
it's just right if we give them an opportunity to prove that they can turn into a better
person and start over.

3rd speaker of the opposition team:

We also have two arguments to rebut the affirmative team. First, criminals clearly
violate human rights, so they don’t deserve to receive the same rights as normal
people. Second, some of their actions can’t be forgiven. They don’t deserve to have a
second chance, even if they have been punished. There is no guarantee that they won’t
make the same mistake twice.