Judge: Josh Cangelosi (San Diego Christian College)
Resolution: Resolved: This house believes that being a vegetarian is a better ethical choice than meat eating.
|Click to begin|
Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.
Posted at October 13, 2014 09:54:15PM EST by joshua chung
Here are my sources:
Posted at October 15, 2014 12:10:00AM EST by Alfred Molier
- Information from GreenPeace: http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/197608/icode/
- Information from Dr. Jacka: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/06/28/grass-fed-beef-a-healthy-diet.aspx
- Information from Dr. Mercola: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/06/28/grass-fed-beef-a-healthy-diet.aspx
Posted at October 15, 2014 09:43:19PM EST by joshua chung
Posted at October 17, 2014 02:44:10AM EST by Alfred Molier
- Information from Discovery.com: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/10-sustainable-farming-practices.htm
- Information from the CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsdepression/
- Information from WWF: http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/about_forests/deforestation/forest_conversion_agriculture/
Posted at October 18, 2014 12:12:52AM EST by joshua chung
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at October 20, 2014 02:57:39AM EST by Josh Cangelosi
|Category||joshua chung||Alfred Molier|
|Use of evidence:||4.5||4.5|
|Coherence of arguments:||5.5||5.5|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||5.5||5.5|
|Identification of key points:||5.5||4.5|
|Comments:||-Awesome speaking in first speech. Great research, and great passion! You are very fun to watch! You have a lot of charisma! I was tired, and you woke me up.
-Good job pointing out drop on deforestation. You should also bring up the fact that family farming (with its emphasis on giving even more land to the animals for grazing) might contribute even more to deforestation).
|-Great speaking, very courteous and articulate. However, you play mainly defense. Try to generate more offense by explaining all the bad things that would happen if we all became vegetarian.
-I really appreciate your courteous speaking style.
The decision is for the Proposition: joshua chung
Reason for Decision:
Opp makes great arguments, but the problem is that opps arguments are primarily defensive rather than offensive. That is, opp gives some reason to believe that family farming will help solve the problems of animal cruelty, hunger/water waste, and global warning. But without any reason why being a vegetarian harms the world in some way, then opp is playing a losing game because vegetarianism will still solve all of those problems better than family farming can. That is, as prop points out, there will still be some risk of animal cruelty with family farming, while there is no risk of animal cruelty with vegetarianism. And family farming might waste less food and water, but opp provides no reasons why vegetarianism will not waste even less food and water. And family farming might reduce methane emissions from cattle by 30%, but vegetarianism will reduce it by 100%. So why not prefer vegetarianism? Opp waits until the last speech to argue that agriculture leads to deforestation too, but opp should make this argument more offensive by giving reason to believe that if we all become vegetarians, even more deforestation will occur than in the status quo. Otherwise, opp just says why not get rid of one cause of deforestation. Opp does put the mental health argument out there, saying that vegetarianism will lead to depression and suicide. This is opps only offensive argument in the round. But prop gets the last word by questioning the source and suggesting some alternate causality. And the risk of global warming particularly in my mind outweighs.