India Williams
Debates Project
December 13, 2013
Period 14
FINAL DRAFT - Reading an Argument
Opening Statement: Webster’s Dictionary defines recycling as, “to make ready for
reuse.” The issue of recycling has been a long debate. Many believe recycling should be
compulsory, and many believe it should be optional. Should recycling be mandatory?
That is the question.
Author’s Position: I strongly agree that recycling should be mandatory because it saves
animals and it is free and convenient for all good Americans to do.
Valid Argument #1
Valid Argument #2
Valid Argument 1: Recycling saves animals.
Valid Argument 2: Recycling is convenient.
Persuasive Term: Statistics, Facts, and
Repetition
Persuasive Terms: Facts and Personal Experience
Support to appeal to your audience:
Support to appeal to your audience:
1)
*50% of waste is
dumped into the ocean.
1)
According to the Department of Waste and
Management, the government provides
every citizen recycling bins.
2)
When I purchased my home, I immediately
received a trash can and a recycling bin.
3)
I was also given a schedule with collection
dates, so I know every other Wednesday my
recycling bin will be emptied. (Show
schedule to the court.)
4)
In addition to the schedule, there are
succinct explanations and pictures of what
to recycle and what should be trashed.
(Show schedule to the court.)
carelessly
*In 2011 alone, 6,000, I repeat
6,000, whales, manatees,
turtles, sharks, and exotic fish died
because of recyclable materials
being carelessly thrown into the
Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
2) Animals confuse the trash for prey
Believe they are hunting animals,
and sadly choke on plastic and
ultimately die.
Conclusion: *If this 50% of waste were
simply placed in those green bins, the
beautiful, azure ocean would be frolicking
with 6,000 more sea creatures who would be
safe in their natural habitat.
Conclusion: With the government providing
every citizen with recycling bins, collection
schedules, and information detailing appropriate
items for reuse, there is no reason any of us
should not recycle.
*Fictitious Info for the sake of an example
1
India Williams
Debates Project
December 13, 2013
Period 14
Author’s Counter-Argument
Author’s Counter-Argument
Counter -Argument 1: Recycling is time
consuming.
Counter -Argument 2: My opponent only had 1 valid
argument.
Persuasive Term: Statistics
(Complete if your opponent has 2 or more valid
arguments.)
Support to appeal to your audience:
Persuasive Term:
I surveyed 100 adults in my neighborhood.
1)
2)
*To make recycling more accessible, 90% of
interviewees stated that they place their
recycling bins directly outside the door on the
patio. When items needed to be recycled, they
simply open the back door and just dump
them. It is just that easy.
Support to appeal to your audience:
*This 90% of responsible citizens also stated
that they involve their families as well. They
teach their children how to save the Earth by
recycling reusable products and involving
them
by having their children take the bins to the
curb for collection.
3) *The other 10% surveyed, purchased an
indoor recycling cart from local retailers.
Each time they have items that need to be
recycled, they simply place them in the
cart. Once the cart is full, they take those
items outside and place them in the
recycling
bin
provided
by
the
government.
Conclusion: There is no valid excuse to
support not recycling. Each person and every
household can participate and devise a plan
that works for them. Whether you place reuse
items in the bins each time they are empty or
whether you place all reusable items in an
indoor recycling cart, the decision is yours.
Just make the ultimate choice and recycle.
2
India Williams
Debates Project
December 13, 2013
Period 14
Closing Statements.
Call to action.
Summarize your reasons for SUPPORTING
this topic.
What do you want your opponents to do?
This is your last chance to persuade them to
adopt your position.
As previously stated, I believe that every
responsible citizen should recycle because
it saves animals and is free and convenient
to do. With just a few seconds, you have
the power to preserve innocent sea
creatures’ lives and to utilize resources that
the Department of Waste Management has
provided to you.
Opponent, I strongly encourage you to
open your mind to understanding the
significance of recycling. The next time
you have a choice to trash OR reduce,
reuse, and recycle, please remember my
arguments presented to you today and
select the latter.
3
India Williams
Debates Project
December 13, 2013
Period 14
Works Cited
Animal Rights National Conference. Animal Rights. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.
Arora, Naimit. “On Eating Animals.” Humanist. July/Aug. 2013: 26-31. Ebscohost. Web. 3 Dec.
2013.
Mack, Gail. Animal Rights. New York: Marshall Cavendish, 2012. Print.
Works Cited criteria
- Times New Roman, Size 12
- Proper Class Heading
- Centered Title
- Sources listed in alphabetical order
- Proper punctuation
- No partial credit; you either have all correct or none correct.
4