In a couple paragraphs, explain the position that you argued in your persuasive speech.
Give the specific reasons and list them as (1), (2), and (3) for why you agree or disagree with the issue you chose.
Then, try to summarize your position in a one sentence proverb.
In my persuasive speech, I argued against the fact that global warming was a legitimate conjecture as to why the earth's climate is changing, and why it is even a bad thing. My reasons for not believing the global warming theory are: (1) the statements of the opposition do not add up, (2) Climate change is a natural process, and (3) the people who proposed the theory do not have credible backgrounds. Throughout my research of the issue, I have come across all of these points, and all of them suggest that global warming is not happening.
ReplyDelete(1) Global warming activists claim that human activities (such as using cars that burn fossil fuels) are rapidly accelerating the heating of the earth. Green house gas effect is not just made up of carbon dioxide; it is made up of mostly water vapor, along with a small percentage of other gases, like carbon dioxide. Since the atmosphere contains only a small percentage of carbon dioxide, and emissions from fossil- fuel burning cars make up even a smaller percentage of that, there is no way that human activities can account for earth's warming.
(2) Now, it has been established that earth is not warming due to human activities, but rather because of a natural cycle. Every 1500 years, earth alternates between hot and cold periods. This cycle has been discovered by top scientists by examining 900,000 year old ice cores. Since this warming occurs naturally, nothing devastating has happened throughout history due to this warming.
(3) Why would anybody believe a scientific theory from a person who does not even have a background in science? Former vice president and politician Al Gore is the key representative of Global warming, and he gives lectures around the country about a subject that he is not even qualified to speak about. From a year's worth of lecturing, Gore made $300,000,000. If global warming was a necessary cause, why is somebody like Gore making all of this money? Just because you are famous, this does not mean that you have the authority to go around speaking about key global issues, such as global warming; this is especially true for someone who majored in government, not science.Global Warming is just a huge money-making scheme.
Proverb: Show me a liar, and I'll show you a thief.
I spoke about gay marriage rights and how I support it in my persuasive speech. Three reasons that I argued are human rights, adoption rights, and religious issues.
ReplyDeleteGay marriage is a human right, and same-sex couples should not be denied it. Human rights are being taken away from people who deserve them just as much as everyone else, and it is about time that changes. Everyone has that one person who they love and want to spend the rest of their life with, and who says that they cannot put a higher label on their relationship? This is a right that the public should already have been given.
Secondly, the marriage of same-sex couples will help in the adoption process of orphans who need a family; therefore, gay marriage should be legal. Gay couples are more likely to adopt children of minorities, the" leftovers", when they adopt. When there is no relation or marriage between a couple that wants to adopt a child, there is a much longer process that can be shortened and sped up by the title of a marriage. Studies show that gay couples are just as capable parents as heterosexual parents, and they even influence open-mindedness, tolerance, and gender equality. Same-sex marriage can help orphans become adopted more often, so why would they be denied a right that will help shorten the process?
Finally, I spoke about religious problems against gay marriage, a strong side in opposition. People say that gay marriage can take away from the real meaning of marriage. This meaning of marriage to these people is a bringing together of the opposite sex, but when it comes down to it, lesbian and gays were created by G-d and should have the right to marry.
Luckily, this problem is getting better over time, but still needs to be resolved. You can't keep a fish out of water forever.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn my persuasive speech, I argued against human cloning for three reasons: 1. Human cloning could create huge divides between classes 2. Human cloning challenges religious views and 3. Human cloning would challenge the stages of reproduction as a whole.
ReplyDeleteIf human clones were created smarter than the average human, what would happen to the regular humans? A big divide in social status and life itself would arise and put us, the regular humans, as the second smartest species in the world. I know most people wouldn't be very happy with that. The creation of a genetically identical copy of a human would turn into millions of copies, leading to the death of our species, and the massive growth of an unnatural species of people.
Human cloning also challenges the religious views of almost every worldwide religion. Instead of putting God as the creator, in most cases, human cloning would replace God with humans. Most religions would force their followers to not participate in the actions of human cloning.
The acts associated with human cloning would heavily interfere with the natural processes of reproduction. This could make mostly everyone rethink the meaning of life. We would eventually be able to create anything we wanted. Life would not be the same as it is now, many changes would have had to be made because of problems that could be simply stopped with the banish of human cloning.
After human cloning, 'Not many people are different' will be the phrase applicable to our lives.
I talked about why we should legalize same-sex marriage in the United States in my persuasive speech. The top three points I made to support same sex marriage had to do with our children, religion, and the benefits it would give to the United States.
ReplyDeleteMy first point was that same sex marriage helps our children. Research shows that gay and lesbian parents are a powerful resource for kids in need of adoption. A study showed that about 65,000 kids were living with adoptive gay parents between 2000 and 2002, with another 14,000 in foster homes headed by gays and lesbians. Another study showed that of gay and lesbian adoptions at more than 300 agencies, 10 percent of the kids placed were older than 6—typically a very difficult age to adopt at. Sixty percent of gay and lesbian couples adopted across races and more than half of the kids adopted by gays and lesbians had special needs. Without same-sex marriage, there would be less adoption and more kids out there looking for homes and loving parents. There would be less children switching from foster home to foster home which might affect other things later in their lives. Also, kids raised by same-sex parents were no worse than the kids of straight couples on mental health, social functioning, school performance and a variety of other life-success measures.
My second point talked about people’s religious reasons for being against same-sex marriage. Different religions have different reasons for not wanting same-sex marriage. But for Christians, who make up 78.4 % of the United States, this verse is the main reason some Christians are against same-sex marriage: “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.” Leviticus 20:13. I am of this religion; therefore I am stereotyped to have the same views on this issue as many other Christians do. But I most certainly do not. I respect what is in the bible and I will make sure that my children read verses in the bible such as this one but who am I to take away people’s rights who don’t even believe in the bible or Christian religion? Who am I to tell them who to marry? One of my sources said something that completely demonstrates my views on this issue. They said, “Religious groups and churches have every right to deny same sex marriage in their parish, but they have absolutely no right to deny it in city hall.”
My last point talked about how the United States could benefit from legalizing same-sex marriage. I believe that if we were to legalize same-sex marriage there would be a lot less discrimination. I believe that if we were to accept more groups and more beliefs into this country, then there would be more and more people willing to accept and become open-minded to these different beliefs and groups. Then the more accepting this country and its people become, the more united we will also become. More united, a stronger and better country will come out of it.
I think that this proverb is appropriate for this topic because in my persuasive speech I had also talked about how if we let people choose who they marry there would be fewer divorces because they would marry the person they love and not the person they are supposed to love. The proverb is “Choose thy love. Love thy choice”
In my speech I argued that violent entertainment is not the reason people are influenced to commit crimes. My reasons for believing this are 1)There is not proper gun control and background checks necessary to keep guns out of the wrong people's hands. 2)Lack of positive influential programming, and finally 3)Lack of serious parenting.
ReplyDelete1)How are we going to even argue about violent broadcasting when we don't even have proper gun control? It is definitely a problem that the somebody goes to see batman, decides to be the villain, and then can get his hands on military-grade weapons and shoots up a movie theatre. Just ridiculous. Also, if there were serious background checks then we could also prevent the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun.
2)People are obviously ready to blame our every day entertainment sources for the horrible acts of violence that seem to be almost routine in the last few months. There is no doubt that media has the ability to strongly affect the population's behavior, especially that of the youth. So if this is clearly the case then we should be broadcasting more positive things in order to maybe cancel out the violence that people are constantly exposed to.
3)None of this is really a possibility if there was good parenting involved in the first place. Adults and parents love to point fingers in the direction of the tv screen, but they forget one very important thing: They don't have to let their kids watch it. It's almost laughable that parents would rather let music, movies, and TV, all things meant to entertain people, raise their children for them. To conclude my argument, I will use a proverb. Children need more models than critics.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn my persuasive speech, I argued against gun control laws and how the government should not put them into affect. This is something I truly believe to be an important topic in our society today that can be easily dealt with once people began to understand the consequences about gun control and the serious effects it could have on our society.
ReplyDelete1) There was a ban on so called "assault riffles" back in the earlier 90's that was put up but then it quickly went away. The tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary resulted in nationwide media attention and sadness towards the young victims of the mass shooting. People began to blame guns instead of people and demanded that there be a ban on "assault rifles". These people are working based on emotion instead of logic and don't understand how guns work. There are already efficient background checks that are in place and are constantly undergoing changes to make them better. These anti-gun groups are currently try to ban "assault rifles" don't really know what an assault rifles is. An assault rifles is a gun that fires multiple bullets per pull of the trigger. What the anti-gun groups are trying to ban are semi-automatic rifles that fire one bullet per pull of the trigger. These anti-gun groups confuse these things to be the same thing but the reason they say "assault rifle" is because a semi-automatic rifle looks the same basically meaning that they are scary looking.
2) It says in the second amendment that "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" therefore we should be able to own the guns we want and not be restricted. There are also talks about further restrictions making it harder to own a gun. If they pass bans and give more restrictions then it'll make it harder to give a gun as a gift or lend someone your gun to go hunting. All those things would be more difficult with the gun control laws and restrictions.
3) If there were to be bans on "assault rifles" then there would be an increase in black market trade which would result in more crime. In black market trade there are no background checks like the ones that we have. The system we have may not be perfect but it is better than illegal trade that would result in more crime.
The unofficial slogan of the national rifle society is "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." I believe this statement is true because if you truly intend to kill someone insanity or not you would do it with any means possible. It just happens that that person chose to use a gun.
As I argued in my persuasive speech, I believe that Affirmative action is an antiquated, backwards, and discriminatory law, and that it should be repealed, aborted, or have whatever needs to be done to it done in order to terminate it completely. I have narrowed my argument down to three points:
ReplyDelete1) Affirmative Action is antiquated. (In this point, I will lay aside the fact that it is the wrong solution anyhow and focus on the fact that what it claims to achieve is already done) Whatever usefulness it may have had when it was introduced following the Civil Rights Movement is now completely gone. I think it goes without saying that immediately following 200 plus years of slavery followed by 100 years of segregation and inequality, African Americans probably needed a hand in getting introduced to universities and jobs. Women, too, had long been considered inferior, only receiving voting rights in the 1920's. Native Americans had been forcefully relocated and killed. Minorities were in a bad place. That is not, however, the case today. Affirmative action has done its job. Racists are shamed and discrimination is against the law. Minority college attendance has skyrocketed. Locally, in Fulton County, it has even become a problem. The AJC recently criticized the county for failure to hire enough non African-American people: This in a county where the majority of the population is white. When your air conditioning is fixed, do you continue to hire a repairman? I'll leave it at that.
2) Affirmative Action is backwards. It attempts to solve the symptoms of an illness rather than cure the illness. Rather than make it easier for a black man to get into college, make his education better. Rather than giving that Asian woman preferential hiring, hire the most fit candidate and encourage her to gain more experience and improve her credentials. Most Woodward students can tell you that the lower the bar is set, the lower we will jump. If you make it easier for people to get what they want, you are cheating them as well as the people who were turned away simply for not being a minority. The most famous man in world history, Jesus Christ, summarized it best when he said "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
3) Affirmative action is DISCRIMINATORY. I saved my biggest problem with this law for last. What do you think someone who heard the words "Affirmative Action" without knowing about the law would think? They would have no idea what it is, because it has been ambiguously named on purpose. There is a practically identical law in Britain called "Reverse Discrimination". Doesn't sound like something many people would support? That's because it isn't. In polls where the law is thoroughly and accurately described, rather than just named, and people are asked if they are in support of it, an overwhelming majority always says no. Discrimination is not made any better by the fact that it happens to be against people who are in the majority. Somehow I doubt that I would be happy if I knew that I had missed being accepted into my college of choice because the school had chosen a less qualified applicant in the name of diversity.
In my persuasive speech, I argued that cyberbullying can be classified as a bigger epidemic than bullying is. Many may argue that with traditional bullying, the physical effects that are drawn upon you are weighted more heavily ,but with cyberbullying, the mental effect can be much more unbearable because the bully is anonymous and it is permanent online for many people to see it.
ReplyDelete(1) A bully can bully a kid all day at school but the teacher can tell him to stop and he most likely will, for now, but with cyberbullying, the bully has no restrictions because he is anonymous. Therefore, the bullied has to endure mental harassment constantly without any parental authority. Almost 14% of high school students have considered suicide and 7% of which have actually attempted it due to cyberbullying according to the CDC.
(2)Usually in traditional bullying, the bully is typically the larger individual with bystanders that aid him in the bullying. In cyberbullying ;however, there are different kinds of cyber bullies.Some cyber bullies are victims of real word bullying, and go online and bully others to feel powerful. Others are bullies offline, and want to extend their sphere of influence and power to the online world. Other cyber bullies just want to show that they can do certain things online to show off.
(3)There are several levels of cyberbullying and text bullying is one. With text bullying, it can happen 24 hours a day, even at home, which is usually a refuge from bullying, so it can feel inescapable. Text bullies are often much meaner because they don't have to see their victims.Text bullying doesn't necessarily go away. It may get passed around and it can end up where someone, like a potential boss, will see it in the future. This can harm the victim further, and can be even more damaging for the bully, who may miss out on job opportunities because of the text messages they sent.
PROVERB: The audience makes the bully, not vice versa.
ReplyDeleteI did my persuasive speech on gun control and why it will not work. The first reason is that people with mental issues and felonies will still be able to obtain firearms via street sales. Not the gun show loophole. The second reason is that if guns are taken from the good guys, there will be no one to defend against mass murders in situations where law enforcement is absent. The final reason gun control is bad is it will put a damper on the economy. Gun and ammo sales are a major part of the American economy, and the restriction of these goods will only hurt the economy and the citizens safety. A good proverb to sum up why gun control is bad is "guns don't kill people, people kill people".
ReplyDeleteIn my persuasive speech, I argued against the use of the death penalty. The death penalty is seen by many in this nation as a justified punishment for the offenses of a citizen. I feel that taking someones life for a crime, no matter the atrocity, is never justified and can be handled in a more humane, and economical way through life imprisonment without the option of parole.
ReplyDelete1) Taking a persons life for committing a crime is inhumane, barbaric, and unnecessary. Obviously there are many sick crimes committed in this country including high murder rates, but what right do we have to do the same to the criminal? This is a clear display of vengeance disguised as justice, and an uncivilized idea that one would think has no place in the 21st century.
2) Life imprisonment is a cheaper alternative to capital punishment. Supporters of the death penalty often argue the opposite, but in fact this is not the case. The jury selection for death penalty cases requires a much more in depth selection, and interview process to select the correct people. It is very common to see many appeals, and retrials in death penalty cases, which are not seen in other cases. Also, the actual putting to death of an individual is an expensive process.
3) The death penalty sends the wrong message to the nations youth. Kids are usually taught to deal with problems without the use of violence, and to avoid it at all costs. Capitol punishment teaches kids the exact opposite of that, and teaches them that since the government uses violence on their citizens, there is no reason to think this is wrong.
A proverb that sums up my feelings about the death penalty "to take a life when a life has been lost is revenge, not justice"
In my persuasive speech i talked about doping also known as steroid induction into the body being bad. Doping in athletes is seen as a modern day accessory for most professional athletes like socks ,shoes, grip, or gloves. This power hungry decision is selfish. The reason why is because it leaves a negative influence on the next generation and tells them that it is okay to dope.
ReplyDeleteSteroids are testosterone based drug. This anabolic steroid can cause deeper voice, smaller testicles,muscle atrophy, headaches, muscle spasm, heart attack, and malfunctions in brain functioning. So with all of these risk why would a professional athlete take it. The reason why is because of greed and selfishness. Professional athletes beat all the odds on their road to stardom with hard work and dedication. However once they reach the step of stardom they stop being that role model because of a slower rate of positive results.
The emotional problems with steroids are not seen by many because of it being a choice. However not only do you affect yourself emotionally but you affect your others. You affect the others who look up to you, others who believed in you, others who have known of you, others that met you. You also affect your own emotions because of an overflow of testosterone. Also the emotional affect once you have been caught or the guilt that you live with knowing that you could have gotten that far by working hard.
Your body is something that is probably most directly affected by steroids. You not only increase risk of memory loss and other adult diseases, but show immediate signs of body and hormonal changes. Your body can develop and abundance of muscle which leads to atrophy. On the other hand, The steroid can cause a chemical in-balance in your body and kill you
The proverb is don't let a needle be your inspiration, but the people and love of the game be your motivation