Proposition:
Resolved: “That Death Penalty be Restored”
Type of Debate: Modified Oregon-Oxford Divisions of Speeches in a Debate a) NecessityNecessity- (First (First Speaker) Speaker) Is it urgently urgently needed? needed? Inevitable? Inevitable? re!uire"ent re!uire"ent?? #e"and? #oes t$e fate of t$e country depend on it? b) %eneficiality- (Second Speaker) Is it useful? &elpful? 'rofitable? 'rofitable? dvantageous? ould ould e gain? *an e save ti"e+ effort+ "oney? c) 'racticabil 'racticabilityity- (,$ird (,$ird Speaker) Speaker) *an it be done? Is it it possible? possible? Is it orkable? orkable? Is it it feasible? feasible? Burden of Proof Vs. Burden of Refutal a) ffir"a ffir"ative tive side side is vested vested t$e burden burden of t$e 'OOF 'OOF (presenta (presentation tion of evidence) evidence) b) Negative Side is vested t$e burden of .F/,0 .F/,0 (presentation (presentation of counter-evidence)1 c) In no case s$all s$all one side assu"e assu"e t$e designati designation on of anot$er in a debate1 debate1 Once t$is t$is is co""itted co""itted t$e Fallacy of S$ifting t$e %urden of 'roof "ay be raised during t$e ebuttal1 Debate Arrane!ent First ffir"ati ative (Neces cessity) - *onstruct uctive Speec$ First Negative 3 Interpellation of t$e first affir"ative speaker First Negative (Non- Necessity) - *onstructive Speec$ First ffir"ative ffir"ative 3 Interpellation of t$e second negative speaker
2 "in1 2 "in1 2 "in1 2 "in1
Seco Second nd ff ffir"a ir"attive (%e (%ene nefficiab ciabiility) ity) 3 *on *onsstruc tructi tive ve Spe Speec ec$ $ 2 "in1 "in1 Seco Second nd Neg Negat atiive 3 Int Interpe erpelllati lation on of t$e seco second nd aff affir"a ir"ati tive ve spe speak aker er 2 "i "in1 Second Negative (Non-%eneficiability) 3 *onstructive Speec$ 2 "in1 Seco Second nd ff ffir"a ir"attive 3 Int Inter erpe pelllati lation on of of t$e t$e seco second nd neg negat atiive spe speak aker er 2 "i "in1 ,$ird ffir"ative ('racticability) 3 *onstructive Speec$ ,$ir ,$ird d Nega Negati tive ve 3 Inte Interp rpel ella lati tion on of t$e t$e t$ir t$ird d affi affir" r"at ativ ivee speak speaker er ,$ird Negative (Non-'racticability) - *onstructive Speec$ ,$ird ffir"ative 3 Interpellation of t$e t$ird negative speaker
2 "in1 2 "in1 "in1 2 "in1 2 "in1
,ea" *aptain ffir"ative 3 ebutal Speec$ ,ea" *aptain Negative 3 ebutal Speec$
2 "in1 2 "in1
"ssues on the Debate: a1 $et$e $et$err or not it it is Neces Necessar sary? y? (Nece (Necessi ssity) ty) b1 $et$er or not it is %eneficial? (%eneficiality) (%eneficiality) c1 $et$e $et$err or not it is 'ract 'ractica ical? l? ('ract ('ractica icabil bility ity)) Rules and #uidelines on Debate Rule and Reulations 41 ,$e "oder "oderato ator5 r5ss decisi decision on is fina final1 l1 61 Observ Observee prop proper er ti"e ti"e li"i li"its ts11 a1 *ons *onstr truc ucti tive ve spee speec$ c$-- 7 "inute "inutess b1 Interpellation- 8 "inutes c1 ebut ebutal al Speec Speec$$- 8 "in "inut utes es
21 91 81 <1
rangling is strictly pro$ibited1 :ualifications and Ob;ections "ust be addressed to t$e "oderator1 'roper decoru" "ust alays be observed1 ,$e rules on evidence s$all be put unto effect1
ny violation of t$e above "entioned rules and guidelines s$all be dealt it$ by corresponding point deductions depending on t$e reco""endation of t$e "oderator $o s$all eig$t t$e gravity of t$e offense1 Role of the $oderator ,$e "oderator of t$e debate $as t$e folloing duties= 41 ,o reveal t$e issue involve t$e debate> 61 ,o rule on points of clarification about t$e issues or !uestions and ansers "ade during t$e Interpellation> and 21 ,o see to it t$at t$e debate is orderly and follos t$e rules of parlia"entary procedures1 Role of the Ti!er:
41 ,o ti"e t$e speakers and debaters accurately> 61 ,o give t$e speakers a one-"inute arning it$ t$e ringing of t$e bell once before $is$er ti"e is up1 21 ,o prevent t$e debaters fro" exceeding t$e ti"e allotted to t$e" by ringing t$e bell tice1 %riteria for &udin a1 .vidence - 68@ b1 #elivery - 2A@ c1 Interpellation - 2A@ d1 ebuttal - 48@
,$e ;udges+ based on t$eir discretion+ s$all $ave t$e aut$ority to deter"ine $o ill be t$e %est Speaker and %est #ebater1 ,$e inning tea" s$all be deter"ined by t$e "a;ority decision of t$e %oard of Budges1 ,ypes of %onstructive Speech !ay be: a1 b1 c1 d1
eading Met$od Me"ory Met$od .xte"poraneous Mix "et$od of "e"ory and conversational or dra"atic
'oise+ gestures+ audience contact and voice pro;ection are $ig$ly reco""ended1
'repared by= #IOS##O '1 .S,IM#+ '$1 #1 Faculty+ *S #ept1
'elpful Tips for the Debaters (Note belo are not part of t$e ules and egulations of t$e #ebate)
Tips on As(in )uestion:
41 sk a s$ort : designed to get a s$ort 1 61 Indicate t$e ob;ect of your :1 21 #onCt telegrap$ your argu"ent+ donCt "ake it too obvious1 91 #onCt ask : t$ey onCt anser properly1DSo+ e in+ rig$t?D 81 Make : see" i"portant+ even if it is ;ust an atte"pt to clarify1 <1 'oliteness is a "ust -- e"p$asiEe t$e difference if t$ey are rude1 71 pproac$ t$ings fro" a non-obvious direction1 ,$en trap t$e"1 1 Mark your flonotes as to $at you ant to !uestion t$e" about1 G1 void open ended :s unless you are sure t$ey are clueless1 4A1 Face t$e ;udgeaudience+ not your opponent1 441 *H ansers "ust be integrated into your argu"ents "ade during a speec$1 #uideline for Ans*erin )uestion:
41 *oncise 1 61 efer to so"et$ing you $ave already said $enever possible1 ,$is is safe1 21 nser based on your position in t$e debate so far1 eep options open1 91 #onCt "ake pro"ises of $at you or your partner ill do later1 81 :ualify your ansers1 <1 %e illing to exc$ange docu"ents read into t$e debate1 71 nser only relevant !uestions1 1 ddress t$e ;udge1 G1 ,ry and not anser $ypot$etical :1 If t$ey de"and+ say you ill give a $ypot$etical 1 4A1 Signal eac$ ot$er+ donCt tag-tea"1 441 #onCt sayDI donCt kno+DsayDI a" not sure at t$is ti"e1111 Rules on "nterpellation:
41 :uestions s$ould pri"arily focused on argu"ents developed in t$e speec$ of your opponent1 &oever+ "atters relevant and "aterial to t$e proposition are ad"issible1 61 :uestioner and opponent s$ould treat eac$ ot$er it$ courtesy1 21 %ot$ speakers stand and face t$e audience during t$e !uestion or Interpellation period1 91 Once t$e !uestioning $as begun+ neit$er t$e !uestioner nor $is opponent "ay consult a colleague1 *onsultation s$ould be done before but as !uietly as possible1 81 :uestioners s$ould ask brief and easily understandable !uestion1 nsers s$ould e!ually be brief1 *ategorical !uestions anserable by yes or no is alloed+ $oever+ opponent if $e c$oose+ "ay !ualify $is anser $y yes or $y no1 <1 :uestioner "ay not cut off a reasonable and !ualifying anser+ but $e "ay cut off a nervous response it$ a state"ent suc$ as a Jt$ank youK Jt$at is enoug$ infor"ationK or Jyour point is !uite clearK or JI5" satisfied1K 71 !uestioner s$ould not co""ent on t$e response of $is opponent1 1 Lour opponent "ay refuse to anser a"biguous+ irrelevant or loaded !uestions by asking t$e !uestioner to rep$rase or refor" $is !uestion1 Rules on Rebuttal Speech:
a1 ebuttal speaker s$ould point out clearly t$e fallacies co""itted by $is opponent stating clearly $at particularly state"ent or argu"ent constitute said fallacy1 b1 If not fa"iliar it$ t$e fallacies of logic+ t$e debater "ay counter argu"ents directly by stating $at argu"ents or state"ent is incorrect or false1
+ther 'elpful Tips on Rebuttal:
41 void repetition1 #onCt ;ust repeat your constructive argu"ents1 %eat t$e ot$er tea"Cs argu"ents and tell t$e ;udge $y your argu"ents are better1 61
void passing s$ips1 #onCt avoid $at t$e ot$er tea" said1 Lou "ust clas$ directly it$ t$eir responses1
21
void reading evidence only1 Lou "ust be explaining and telling t$e ;udge $y t$ese issues in t$e debate1
91
void rereading evidence t$at $as already been read in constructive1 Lou can "ake reference to it by referring to it+ but donCt re-read it1
81
void Jlu"ping and du"ping1D#onCt try to go for everyt$ing1 Lou canCt "ake 46 responses to eac$ argu"ent in a fe "inutes1
<1
%e organiEed1 #onCt ;u"p fro" issue to issue at rando"1 %e specific and logical about inning issues1
71 #onCt be a blabbering "otor "out$1 Speak !uickly but not beyond your ability1 If you speak too fast+ you ill stu"ble and not get t$roug$ as "uc$1 1
#onCt $ine to t$e ;udge about fairness or $at t$e ot$er tea" "ig$t $ave done t$at you t$ink is unet$ical1 Make responses and beat t$e"1
G1
#onCt "ake ne argu"ents1 Lou can read ne evidence but you canCt run ne disadvantages or topicality responses1 Lou are li"iting to extending t$e positions laid out in t$e constructive speec$es1
4A1 /se signposting1 Make sure t$e ;udge knos $ere you are on t$e flo s$eet1 ,$is is not t$e ti"e to lose t$e ;udge on t$e flo1 441 /se issue packages1 OrganiEe your argu"ents into issue packages1 *$oose argu"ents $ic$ you ant to in1 #onCt go for everyt$ing1 .xtend t$ose argu"ents t$at you need to in1 461 *ross-apply argu"ents1 If you dropped an argu"ent in a prior speec$ t$at you t$ink as i"portant donCt act like your losing1 *ross-apply argu"ents you "ade so"e$ere else in t$e debate to anser it1 ,ypes of %onstructive Speech !ay be: e1 f1 g1 $1
eading Met$od Me"ory Met$od .xte"poraneous Mix "et$od of "e"ory and conversational or dra"atic
'oise+ gestures+ audience contact and voice pro;ection are $ig$ly reco""ended1
"llustrative Sa!ples of $a(in %onstructive Speech Proposition: Resolved: That Absolute Divorce be ,eali-ed in the Philippines
Mr1 Moderator+ our dear opponents on t$e negative side+ class"ates+ ladies and gentle"en= e+ on t$e affir"ative side propose t$at absolute #IO*. s$ould be legaliEed $ere in t$e '$ilippines1 e absolutely believe t$at it is practical+ necessary and be neficial to apply divorce $ere in our country1 Practicability s t$e first speaker+ I believe t$at t$e legaliEation of absolute divorce is practicable o n t$e folloing pre"ises= . "t is practical to choose divorce rather than that of annul!ent. #ivorce is a ay of dissolving a legal "arriage t$at per"its t$e partners to re"arry if t$ey c$oose1 It differs fro" annul"ent+ $ic$ declares a "arriage invalid because of so"e defect in t$e contract1 The trend here in our country about annulment is that one of the partners has to make stories that his/her spouse has psychological defects, or psychological incapacity that unables them to assume the essential obligation of marriage just to rush the process on the court but it$ divorce you don5t $ave to "ake stories+ ;ust tell t$e" t$e real reason t$en leave t$e" to t$eir $ands1 /0ou need to present court records1evidences to prove this alleation.2 3. "t is *ritten in the Bible ccording to t$e %ible itself+ Deuteronomy 24:1 tells us t$e folloing= JWhen a man takes a ife and marries her, if then she finds no fa!our in her eyes because he has found some indecency in her he therefore rites her a bill of di!orce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house "K ,$is biblical passage is it$out doubt t$e ords of od1 ,$is i"plies t$at even od per"its divorce1 /0ou need to present the Bible as evidence to prove *hat you say2
4. Accordin to the %onstitution ,$e c$urc$ s$ould not $ave any interference it$ t$e la and t$erefore s$ould allo t$e legaliEation of t$e bill divorce1 #ccording to the 1$%& 'onstitution of the (epublic of the )hilippines, #rticle ** Declaration of )rinciples and +tate )olicies, +ection 2 states that the separation of 'hurch and state shall be in!iolable"/0ou need to present the 567 %onstitution to support your state!ent2 8. "ssues on Physical and 9!otional Abuse *t is a gra!e threat among our society on the mushrooming of issues about battered i!es. physically and emotionally abused i!es" It is about ti"e t$at e s$ould ake up to our senses and find out a ay to solve t$is /nder t$e foregoing pre"ises+ e t$erefore+ resolved t$at t$e absolute divorce s$ould be legaliEed and applied in t$e '$ilippines on t$e basis of its practicability1 /0ou need to present data1court records to prove this alleation2
Mr1 Moderator+ I a" no ready for interpellation1
