Debate Speech Rebuttals

Good morning guys! The topic for our debate is about making the military services for mandatory. So I’ll be speaking for the opposition or disagreement side. We agree with the definition given by the affirmative team. However, we the negative team believe that this statement is false. Today as first speaker I will be talking to you about Due to many situations that are happening in our country like Saba baklava, Again as Separately and the latest issue with Taiwan, Don’t you think the government should prepared its citizen for the upcoming unexpected events that may happen.

I’ve list my pros and con below pros 1. Provide preparedness for disaster 2. Personal growth on an individual (Maturity, I guess) 3. Discipline 4. Tambala and Obese will be lessen Con 1 . The Government and some of its officials are corrupt, they might exploit the trainees. Same pros and cons. Unfortunately, ROTC pa nag Lang, away an, military service pa kayak? Serving one’s country and risking one’s life for a country is definitely and honorable thing to do. This is true for those who have the interest in saving their country, but not for those who are Just following the military draft.

It is given that there are people who are willing to sacrifice their lives for their country but how about those who are not really willing to do so? Are they going to be one of those people who will get caught in the middle of difficult situations like wars? Well, there are various advantages and disadvantages in entering the military draft, and being able to learn these things will help you determine whether Joining the military draft is a good choice or not. The Top 2 Pros of Military Draft To start learning whether military draft is favorable or not, here are some of its pros: .

The Country Will Have Enough Reserved Soldiers to Fight One of the main purposes of mandatory enlistment is that, the country will have enough number of soldiers to send whenever there are outbreaks of war. People who have enlisted are called for and are sent to nations at war. 2. Equality of Citizens is Promoted Since most of the citizens will be under the mandatory enlistment, no one will be exempted from facing wars. People from all walks of life will have the opportunity to be called and sent to any nation where wars are starting and needing of extra soldiers replacements.

The Top 2 Cons of Military Draft Though the purpose of the military draft is, somehow, reasonable for the security of the country and every person residing in it, there are still disadvantages that are noted for the enlistment and these are as follows: 1 . Free Will is Violated Since each citizen is required to undergo the military training and should enter the army, their free will in choosing to Join is violated. Citizens will not have the final say whether they should Join or not since it is a mandatory process that is being implemented throughout the country. . Quality of Military Service is Compromised Unlike those people who are willing to serve the country for a long time as a soldier, draft soldiers are considered as inexperienced and may provide low quality of combat skills whenever they are sent to wars. Since these inexperienced people were not able to spend a lot of time with using their combat skills, the rate for combat death may increase as these people are sent. Should the Military Draft be Continued?

Provided that you have already read the pros and cons of military draft, you can now decide whether the implementation of this program is acceptable or not. If you were o decide on its continuous implementation, would you agree to be trained without willingness or would you do this for the sake of your country? The decision is for you to make and it is you who can give the opinion on whether military draft is as favorable as how the leaders of the country sees it. Compulsory Military Service Pros and Cons There have been times throughout history where compulsory military service has been the law of the land.

Through the experiences of the required draft and forced military service, we have learned that there are some advantages and disadvantages to mandating service. Many veterans say that their time in the military was rewarding and fulfilling. Others rarely speak of their mandated service. That means it becomes important to evaluate all of the pros and cons of this subject. Here Are the Pros of Compulsory Military Service It creates an adequate defensive force. When there is a draft in place, it allows a nation’s military to be able to adequately defend its interests.

This means that there will always be enough trained soldiers to meet the demands of war should one start. Ultimately it sets up the foundation of keeping a nation’s citizens sufficiently protected. It spurs higher numbers of volunteers. When there is mandatory enlistments happening, then more volunteers for long-term military service come forth. Many mandatory situations allow volunteers to choose the branch of the military where they serve, something that most drafts or mandatory enlistments do not allow. It provides a certain level of societal equality.

Because a vast majority of citizens in any nation would qualify for mandatory military service, the policy equalizes the social and financial status that households have. Everyone is called into service and everyone is taken to a theater of war should it break out, whether they’re lithely rich or drowning in poverty. Here Are the Cons of Compulsory Military Service The quality of the military is ultimately compromised. Most people who enter into military service in a mandatory fashion are inexperienced in the ways of a solider and may provide a below average ability in a combat scenario.

What’s one thing that inexperience on the front lines often causes? Fatalities. It limits a person’s overall rights. In the United States, there’s the guarantee to pursue happiness. Having a mandatory system of military service could violate that guarantee for many people. The average person doesn’t have the final say in the process and feeling forced to serve creates second-class services quite often. It would create a second-class citizen. Imagine what would happen to those who are disqualified from service because of health issues?

It would cause them to be treated as second-class citizens in their society. There’s the men and women training to go off to war… And then there’s the 18 year old kid with a bad knee and a heart murmur that is treated with scorn because he can’t serve like everyone else. Compulsory military service has happened in the past simply because there was no other choice. For many nations today, there is a choice. By weighing the pros and cons of this subject, each community can decide if requiring time in the military is the right choice to make.

Mandatory military service is a very tentative subject. You have one side who is all for it and the many benefits it would provide to the men and women of our country. But then you have the side who is highly against as well. By law, if mandatory military service existed in America, it would most likely be effective immediately for those men and women leaving high school, to Join the military for at least two years. Many Mounties in the world today still force their men, and in some cases women, to go into service. Iran, Greece, Russia, South Korea and Egypt to name a few.

The advantages to having mandatory military service are tremendously good. Citizens would become stronger not only physically, but mentally as well. Our society as a whole would become more interested in world affairs as well, since no one would want to be participating in another war. Most foreign countries wouldn’t want to mess with us either if we have 300 million battle-hardened soldiers. No country would even think of invading us if every man, woman and child in our nation knew owe to fight and react to a real combat situation.

It would result in utter chaos for the invaders; everywhere they look there would be an enemy. We’d also come to respect some of the many freedoms and values our country has, since many freedoms are lost when they are put into the service, specifically in boot camp. Many men and women have died to protect those rights, but many of us take them for granted, myself included. We don’t really understand how good we have it. Drive down the street and you’ll probably pass more McDonald’s and other fast food restaurants than could be counted on both of your hands.

Stores are now digitizing because we are too lazy to go and get the product we want ourselves, most prefer it delivered in the mail to our doorstep overnight. The benefits of hundreds of years of peace at home are showing brightly. During the past 20 years, there has been a dramatic increase in obesity in the United States and rates continue to climb. In 2010, every state in America stated that 20 percent or more of the people were obese. Now, 35. 7 percent of adults in the United States are obese and approximately 17 percent of children and adolescents aged 2-19 years are obese.

Article Rebuttal

This paper will acknowledge the pros to proceeding with the smoking ban to rebuttal the argument presented in the article titled, “The case against smoking bans” by Thomas A. Lambert and analyze the reliability, credibility, and validity of the data used to support his argument. According to Lambert (2012), “Government-imposed smoking bans are unwise”. “Risk based argument are insufficient because the slight risks associated with TEST cannot Justify the substantial privacy intrusion occasioned by sweeping smoking bans” (p 34).

The author’s support against the smoking ban is based on the fact that the statements regarding the need for the ban due to the increase of health care costs for the smoker and those effected by the second-hand make. Lambert supports his argument based on the findings of a comprehensive study in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1997. The study states, “… Smoking probably has the effect of reducing overall healthcare costs because smokers die earlier than nonsmokers.

The study authors concluded that in a population in which no one smoked, health care costs would be 7 percent higher among men and 4 percent higher among women than the costs in the current mixed population of smokers and nonsmokers” (Government-imposed smoking bans are unwise, 2012, p 36). Although, this data is credible based on its source, this information cannot wholly be deemed valid based on no stated facts to compare healthcare costs of the nonsmokers. “Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning” (Cheeseboard, T. , O’Connor, L. , & Iris, F. , 2010).

There are four types of common logical fallacies, which are: faulty causation, hasty generalization, either/or thinking, slippery slope and faulty comparison. The Justification based on the other data is an example of a hasty generalization and faulty comparison. A hasty generalization occurs when “… A few examples are selected to represent the whole of the conclusion” (Cheeseboard, T. , O’Connor, L. , & Iris, F. , 2010). By committing to these generalizations, your conclusions may be incorrect because you are only acknowledging the data that will solely support your argument.

The author’s argument is also a faulty comparison because he treats the unique situations the same. He strongly believes that there is no significant difference in the costs of health care in comparison to those who do not smoke. But the author fails to mention the health effects of second hand smoke ND why it should be banned in public places In contrast, smoking bans in public places should be implemented because there are many studies that reveal that there is a real problem regarding exposure to second hand smoke.

According to the CDC (2012), “Since 1964, 2. 5 million nonsmokers have died from exposure to secondhand smoke”. That statement alone, which is evidence based, is a valid argument why smoking in public places should be banned. Non-smokers should not have to be victims caused by careless smokers who are more interested in feeding their addiction and pleasures. It is intrusion of someone’s privacy if they do not want to be exposed to secondhand smoke. Public places refers to as restaurants, parks, multiuse housing and casinos etc.

For children, secondhand smoke exposure can contribute to respiratory and ear infections and higher risk of sudden infant death syndrome. For adults, it can cause lung cancer and cardiovascular diseases. With that being said, if we choose not to smoke due to the health effects and increased risk of death, why should we forced to go down with the smokers? We have a choice and it would be respected. If these health conditions can be caused by secondhand smoke alone, consider what effects smoking has on a smoker’s body.

Abortion rebuttal

To help stop so many babies from being aborted I think that Roe v. Wade should be limited and have analyses, so that it only protects necessary abortions that are medically necessary. Every year, almost 150,000 women in the U. S. Along have abortions past the first trimester, meaning that every year, abortions does not Just remove so-called “non- viable” tissues, but kills 150,000 viable babies. This also happens all over the world, most prominently in place like China and India where having a son is not Just a desire but a need.

This problem runs so deeply in the arguments of our country and others, that unethical medical procedures are being ignored. America is a country of freedom, a country where people can make their own choices. Many people who are pro-choice believe that women should be given the freedom to choose, and by doing so, seem to align themselves with American ideals of freedom. But they are wrong. This is why many have decided to shun pro life advocates. Another reason, is that no one is willing to compromise on vague definitions of terms used in abortion acts.

For example, the Medical Merriam- Webster Online dictionary defines viability as “The quality or state of being viable: the ability to live, grow, and develop”. A question that has never been able to be answer with certainty is ‘ when does the fetus become viable? ‘ The U. S. Is the only major country who has no standard definition of viability. It shows that viability can be seen in 15% of all babies at 23 weeks, 50% at 24 weeks, and 79% at 25 weeks. If a woman is willing to have sex, she is knowingly taking the chance of getting pregnant.

The society we live in now has many ways to prevent pregnancy. There is birth control pills, condoms, DID, diaphragm, foam since some people can’t take the pill it makes them sick. To avoid pregnancy a women needs to have safe sex. If she effuses to use contraception and gets pregnant as a result, that’s her fault, and her responsibility. Choosing to have an abortion is a difficult decision a woman may feel like she may have to make if she had only chose to practice safe sex.

Many women are getting abortions out of choice rather than not being medically necessary. More than 95 percent of abortions are done out of convenience. In some case women are dying or getting seriously injured from the abortion procedure. Since abortion is legal, women are Just using it as a form of birth control. Some places will do abortions up to the 25th week of pregnancy and the baby is establishing a play and nap routine and recognizes your voice and is skin is starting to look more like a newborn.

Abortions should only be done if they are medically necessary and this needs to be enforced by Justice courts. New laws need to be made so that all these innocent babies that didn’t ask to be brought into this world can be given the fair chance they deserve. I think both the mother and father should be held responsible for the choice they made. If nothing else adoption is another option that gives that baby the life the deserve. Abortion is a self act for someone who doesn’t want to be responsible.

Edward snowden is a hero:rebuttal

Edward Snowmen has been referred as a Hero in various news media and several newspaper articles. Edward Snowmen is one of the biggest traitors our country has ever seen. Douglas Rushmore from CNN refers to Snowmen as a Hero. Snowmen is compared to whistle blower Daniel Lesser for leaking the “Pentagon Papers” . The “Pentagon Papers” have nothing to do with taking 4 laptops of information of every surveillance program the United States has and defecting the amount.

Edward Snowmen claims he started as security guard for the National Security Agency. He went on to work for the Central Intelligence Agency in 2006 in the information technology department. He also claims to have worked for civilian contractors employed by intelligence and security agencies from Switzerland to Japan. Edwards Snowman’s career could not verified because of National Security. The last three months before fleeing the country, Snowmen worked for a consulting firm, Bose Allen Hamilton, Kina Signal Intelligence Operations Center, in Hawaii.

This is a secret facility located underground in proximity to Wheeler Army Airfield. In May 2013, Edward Snowmen exposed the existence and functions of several programs employed by the United States and British intelligence agencies to monitor Internet and phone communication, notably PRISM, NSA call database, Boundless Informant, and Tempore. The Guardian, a British newspaper whose online offering makes it the second more popular British newspaper website, published the information. He has told the world how the Unites States and United Kingdom have been monitoring communications to catch terrorists.

Douglas Rushmore wrote “Snowmen is a hero because he realized that our very humanity was being compromised by the blind implementation of machines in the name of making us safe (Rushmore, 2013, Called a defector, leakier defends his decision)”. Rushmore and various media outlets do not realize he defected with 4 laptops of every spy program the CIA and the NSA use. This is the biggest act of espionage this country has ever seen. The media also does not realize the significance of him initially trying to defect to China. He worked in the Kina Tunnel, a Hawaiian facility that intercepts Chinese communications.

He has significant knowledge on how we spy on China. I know this for fact because I worked in Kina Tunnel for 3 years while I was stationed in Hawaii. Snowmen also claims he is familiar with Chinese Mandarin language like most who work in Kina. Congress was well aware of the potential threat of Snowmen seeking asylum with the Chinese. He fled to China with laptops containing detailed blueprints of how the NSA and CIA conduct certain surveillance operations. Fortunately, China wanted nothing to do with him for fear of bad relations with the United States . Several experts believe China copied the opts anyways but it cannot be proven.

Snowmen was given temporary asylum in Russia at the dismay of the United States. Douglas Rushmore and several other media outlets claim he is hero out of ignorance. They claim he exposed the world that the United States was illegally monitoring our privacy. Who cares if a computers data log our privacy looking for keywords that terrorist use if it makes us safer. The Pentagon might need to spend billions to overcome the damage done to military security by Edward Snowman’s release of classified intelligence documents (Copra, 2014). The NSA also said it will eke decades to overcome the damage of Snowmen defecting to China and Russia.

Rebuttalment

Rebuttal I’ll start with my opponents first contention that there are a number of Jobs in the united states that have to be done if money is being funded into vocational education then the Job being sought after will have a better qualified candidate than one that would require a college degree.

That maybe be so but what they aren’t considering is the fact that after the candidate that is getting a degree is done getting their degree, they will be making double the about of money than someone with vocational education could possible make therefore paying back the amount of money that was funded to them by the government and also making profit instead of losing money. Freebooters. Up. Du shows that people with vocational education are more than 4 times more likely to be unemployed than doctoral (Ph. D. Deed. D. , MD, or JDK) graduates. Four-year graduates (Bachelor’s) make $387 more per week than high school grads. That’s $1,548 per month or $18,576 per year more. This pattern holds true among all US racial groups and among males and females. So why fund vocational education when it doesn’t really give back to us instead we are Just funding education that doesn’t farther advance us in any way but wastes money from our government that could go towards preparatory education which does give back and advances us.

Also a recently published E-article articulated the many benefits of college graduation that pointed out that the higher your education the better your medical insurance, health, lifestyle for family and next generation, contribution to society, and more. Education, especially earning degrees, is a doorway to many life-long payoffs to college graduates. Moving on to their second contention that choosing a vocational school will help the student be taught Job specifics for the Job they want to do, they wont need to take extra classes to get their training they need as you would have to do at a traditional four year college.

But like I stated in my second contention Someone who has preparatory education throughout the learning of their own future Job will most likely place someone with the vocational education because they only have one skill while the other has more than one that they can offer to their Job. You need education because we live in a credentialed society. Credentialed Societies are societies which use diplomas or degrees to determine who is eligible for a Job.

The key in the US is to graduate every chance you get so you are better benefited over someone with a vocational education who doesn’t have the same advantages as someone with preparatory education because having one skill nowadays is not enough. Remember Max Weeper’s concept of life chances? Life Chances are an individual’s access to basic opportunities and resources in the marketplace. The very few in our society born into extreme wealth have enormous life chances when compared to the rest of us.

Can you run for political office without the proper social connections among the country’s power elite? Probably not. Can you become famous or extremely successful without access to extremely well educated friends and associates who are connected to those corporate owners and board members? Probably not. Can you call a friend and get a huge favor for your children with the understanding that someday you will reciprocate back with a huge favor for their children?

Underage Drinking Rebuttal Analysis

Lifeguards Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Abstract Most college students in the U. S fall between the 18-21 age bracket. As is custom, the highlight of an active collegiate lifestyle is partying, where binge drinking is the highlight of the day. In retrospect, the legal drinking age still stands at 21 . Some proponents for the lowering of the legal drinking age from 18 to 21 contend that at that age, one is appended adult-like responsibilities such as the right to make decisions on their own, Joining the military, marrying and starting a family, to mention but a few.

In this regard, these proponents argue that if one is considered responsible enough to be trusted with the safety of the country, why not be trusted enough to consume alcohol? This has been the subject of rife debate in recent times, as either side puts arguments and counterarguments forth. Introduction A 2008 article authored by John Cloud headlined “Should the Drinking Age Be Lowered? ” published on Friday, June in Time argues that the legal drinking age should remain steady at 21, and should not be lowered to 18 as critics would like to have it.

A particular statement that tickles my fancy was “It’s unclear why shifting the menu of drinking from frat houses to bars will help solve the problem of hard-core student drinking” (Cloud, 2008). Although Cloud presents a sound argument, it is more sensible to implement more methodical and all-encompassing alcohol education to the youth engaging in underage drinking, as a more educated and enlightened youth is much more likely to steer clear of the harms stemming from underage drinking, such as drunk driving and teenage suicides.

As such, this argument does not sufficiently add up to the premise that lowering the legal drinking age to 18 would be tantamount to heightening the level of risk already caused by alcohol. In the article, Cloud (2008) contends that lowering the drinking age to 18 would lead to an increase in the pre-existing problems associated with underage consumption of alcohol. Regrettably, this is but a fallacy in that, teens have and will most likely continue to abuse alcohol is such settings, regardless of whether or not the legal drinking age remain unaltered.

This heartrending state of affairs begs the question of whether or not parents and society can do better to best prepare children and teens to be responsible drinkers. Banning the consumption of alcoholic beverages is not sufficient for these youth. Statistics from consistent surveys suggest that more than 70% percent of teens have consumed an alcoholic beverage at least once before achieving the legal drinking age of 21 (Spots, Greenberg, & Tourist, 2008).

Rebuttal

University of Phoenix This was a hard article to read because of my religious belief and where I stand as an adult. I understand that people are entitled their opinions and beliefs. Megan Patella made the choice of aborting her pregnancy after she and her husband was told that their son would have severer medical issues. I have four children, ranging from twenty-two to nine. My nine year-old is autistic and needs constant attention. I cannot and begin to understand why one would want to kill a life for any reason.

Megan and her husband, according to the article were trying to conceive a child late In adulthood. Not until they got the result from the genetics doctor that their son “would have a chromosomal disorder and would present a series of major physical and emotional challenges and possible surgeries down the road” (Patella, 2103). I highlighted possible because even right here there was that uncertainty of the test result. Megan stated that her and her husband felt that they were dealt a bum hand with this conception. No one dealt them anything they were trying to conceive a hill.

Life In Itself is a miracle, which according to Florida vital statistic there were 237,166 births In 2006. Then to get the readers to be passionate about her cause she states the doctor put her and her husband out Into the parking lot thro. She leads the reader to believe that this was there only exit because they ask about aborting there son. Not only did Megan go through with the abortion she did so in an unlawful manner. Florida law prohibits that termination off pregnancy in the second or third trimester without the consult of a second physician.

Megan stated In her article that Florida law prohibits abortion after 24 weeks. According to Stomacher Institute, State of Later Abortions the state of Georgia has some relax laws when it comes to abortions. This is why Megan and her husband drove to another city possible out of state to Georgia. Laws were not meant to be broken. This was a true homicide, killing an unborn child in the manner in which they did should be outlawed. Then there was the complication that resulted in hospitalizing. To me this is Just karma; they terminated something that was given to them by God.

Megan stated that she did a lot of research to find a doctor that would perform abortion surfing the Internet. Megan references the Stomacher Institute, which is a web site that is put into place to enhance public awareness on sexual and reproduction health worldwide. Stomacher Institute is a non-based university that has received many prestigious awards. Megan used a valid source to gain here information in her article. In the State of Later Abortion article on the Stomacher website it identifies by state what laws prevail over abortions? Megan Is ten Dormer executive alter AT Baa

K magazine. I Nils Is Interesting, Decease It sheds a different light on the subject. With her Journalism skills, Megan strategically placed small innuendos throughout her article to gain compassion from the readers. First Megan stated the doctor lead her to a door that opened in a parking lot. Without knowing the building I am sure that was the same door she came into. Second Megan stated that the doctor was not cordial when he entered the room, and how the procedure room looked. This statement could be true however it once again allows the reader to feel sorry for situation.

The Claim and The Rebuttal

A popular quote from the Declaration of Independence, “all men are created equal” (Declaration of Independence), speaks about equality for “all men” In terms of equality in God’s eyes and liberty from tyranny. However, when the Founding Fathers drafted this final version of the Declaration of Independence, they did not consider all men apart of the “all men” that had unalienable Rights. This view Is evident In the document because it excludes certain peoples In both 1776 and society today that were treated unequally.

Women and slaves were not considered apart of the men mentioned In the “all en are created equal” statement, making It Invalid. In Document A, Jefferson condemns the King for taking away the liberty of the slaves. However, he Is a hypocrite. Jefferson says, “… Purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them… ” (Doc A), which clearly shows that he did not consider the slaves to be equal to the men he and his fellow Founding Fathers wrote about.

The Declaration of Independence proclaimed that the “Rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” are unalienable, meaning they cannot be taken away. How is it then, Africans can be stripped of these absolute Rights and sold to others? Only if these laves were not apart of “all men” it would be possible for the King to take these Rights away. In Document B, a similar attitude is taken up about women. The correspondence between the couple, John and Abigail Adams talks about women’s rights. Abigail begs John to include privileges for women in the Declaration of Independence.

Women will be able to pursue their happiness through the exercise of more privileges (e. G. Representation), especially, she notes, if women weren’t just treated as “vassals of you Sex”(Doc B), or in a property-like manner by men. However, John responds by saying, “We know better than to repeal our Masculine yester” (Doc B). He goes onto explain how unnecessary it would be to include women’s rights. Essentially he says that this system in this society (man-dominated) should not be changed, as long as men do not act tyrannical towards women.

This response shows that he does not believe women to be part of “all men” with unalienable Rights. How can women pursue their own happiness, If they aren’t considered to have these rights? In 1 776, “all men are created equal” was obviously untrue, but what of society today? Despite the great strides toward Inequality for molesters everywhere, the tenement, ” all men are created equal” Is still not completely true. Document C shows the different treatment of the natural born and alien.

Allen’s must go through the naturalization process to become citizens, while the natural born gained It by birth in that country, as demonstrated in this line: “children of such persons so naturalized shall also be considered as citizens of the united States” (Doc C). If all men are equal in God’s eyes, why is it that some of his men must go through the process of naturalization, while others, for the sole reasons of age and birth place, to go through naturalization. Since this policy has not changed since 1790, the conclusion is that all men are not created equal.

Examples in history support the claim that all men are not created equal. Exclusion of women, and slaves defend this statement during the 1776 time period. Differentiation between the natural born and immigrants and the unchanged policy justify this claim for the current time frame. In order for all men to truly be created equal, there must be no different treatment among all men. But in a society with strongly embedded ideas of egotism, and ethnocentrism, will it ever be possible for “equality for all” to be achieved? It seems highly unlikely.

Rebuttal Speech: Gay Marriage

Of course it should be legal. Just like it should be legal anywhere you go in this world. God gave us this world to take care of and to love one another. If love is a good thing then why should humans put limitations on what love is good and what love is bad. If you are not hurting anybody then it must not be all that bad then. And If 2 people love each other then being married should not be such a big deal. If 2 people love each other enough to get married and bound to one another In the eyes of our lord then why would we try to stop It.

Gays should be given the same rights as everyone else. Gay marriage would allow same sex partners to enjoy the benefits of being married, for example, insurance coverage for their partner, the legal right for the partner to inherit their partners assets upon death. Things like in the US- according to its constitution and laws (all men are created equal, equal rights, etc) – there should be a “union” were the gay couple should have all rights that a married couple does. There are many other whole countries who recognize same-sex marriage.

Some people, who may have negative thoughts about gays, are close indeed, or have a conflicting religion – will say they shouldn’t. But others, who can sympathize with them, are open minded, believe in equal rights, or are gay themselves will say that they should be. Same-sex marriage isn’t Just a matter of religion – it’s a matter of equal rights for human beings – people use what they learn from religion as the filter for what they determine Is right or wrong. I believe that marriage should be between two people who love each other and It Is not the government’s place to interfere with love.

The benefiting of love, according to dictionary. Com is as follows: Nerdy strong affection: an intense feeling of tender affection and compassion. ” If gay people feel this way then why shouldn’t they be able to be married? If they are happy with each other, said persons should be able to marry. I believe we need to change the world for future generations. We feared that different religions were going to clash, but now all of the religions coexist. White people had Black and Hispanic slaves, but we overcame the odds and now White men, Black men, and Hispanic men can be equals.

If it is possible to overcome such fierce obstacles then we can overcome the boundary obstructing gay marriages and straight marriages alike. Gay marriage should be legalized for these reasons. Evolution will always continue and at any given point in time, something will occur that we will not like in this world, but we can overcome this. Gay marriage is a controversial issue that people have been fighting for years and it has finally come to the surface. We should take charge of it. This speech was credit to different owner from different site in the internet

Rebuttal Paper

There are millions of people all over the world who suffer from painful and often terminal diseases. In his article, “How the War on Drugs Punishes Those Who Suffer,” Jason Silversides explains the reasons for a disparity in available pain medicine between high-income countries and middle to low Income countries. The International Narcotics Control Board binds countries to pain medicine quotas by Income (Silversides).

In poorer countries around the world, governments focus more on preventing injection drug abuse than they do promoting use of the drugs for pain life. Silversides believes that nurses should be able to give patients pain medication. Although there Is a large disparity In available pain medication between rich and poor countries, the disparity Is due to lack of education and frequent government Intervention. Middle Income to low Income countries receive significantly more amounts of pan medication than do the richer countries In the world. Though nearly 50% of the world’s cancer patients and 90% of the world’s HI AIDS patients live ;n low-to-middle Income countries, they only receive 6% of the oral’s morphine supply. North America and Europe, on the other hand, receive close to 89% of the world’s morphine (Silversides). ” It is true that there is more morphine in wealthier countries but these countries also have a higher rate of drug abuse. Allotting the lower income countries more pain medication would then create more drug abusers.

This would cause more harm than good because lower income countries would experience more drug problems. These countries are also not nearly as educated about drugs and communicable diseases and would be more likely to increase rates of drug related issues and HIVE/AIDS. Silversides believes that nurses should be able to giver prescriptions of hydrocarbon to patients in need. “In January, an FDA committee voted to move hydrocarbon combination medicine into the restrictive schedule 2 category of controlled substances. Here’s what this means.

A nurse at a long-term care facility cannot communicate a schedule 2 prescription to a pharmacy, which means a patient must wait until she is seen by a doctor (Silversides). ” Although allowing nurses to prescribe pain medication it would create or quicker pain relief for those in need it would also make the medication more readily available for people who do not need pain medication. Nurses are not properly trained to notice the difference between a person in pain and someone looking to get a fix of his or her favorite pain medication.

Silversides references two UN treaties that he claims should put countries In a “bind”. The 1961 Single Convection on Narcotic Drugs “alms to combat drug abuse by limiting possession, use, trade in, distribution, import, export, manufacture and production of drugs exclusively to medical and scientific purposes (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. )” The second treaty that Is referenced Is the Convention on Psychotropic Substances In 1 971 .

This convention established an International control system for psychotropic substances because of the expansion of drugs of abuse and Introduced controls over a number of synthetic drugs according to their abuse potential vs.. Not actually put countries in a bind. The first treaty basically legalizes narcotics to be used for medicinal purposes. The second treaty adapted the law to deal with new drugs of abuse” and also allow governments to rule if medicines addictive value does more harm to a patient than good.

Silversides also only assumes that poorer countries put more emphasis on preventing substance abuse than it does trying to get more pain medication for patients. Silversides believes the reason for disparity in the amounts of available pain medication between high-income countries and low- income countries is due to the war on drugs. Although there is a large disparity in availability of pain medication it is due to the lower development level of certain countries around the world.

Less educated countries are more likely to spread communicable diseases while abusing certain pain medication. Silversides also thinks nurses should be able to prescribe schedule 2 narcotic to patients in need. However, he does not take into account the number of people who fake injuries and pin in order to get some pain medication. There will be no change in the disparity of available pain medication until strides can be made to properly educate poorer countries on the dangers of pain medication abuse as well as consequences of sharing needles and other injection paraphernalia.