The legal age to purchase/consume/possession of alcohol should not be lowered in the United States
Debate Rounds (3)
Onto the Parameters:
Pro/For - will argue that the legal age to purchase/consume alcohol in the United States should not be lowered according to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 and is acceptable as is stated
Con/Against - will argue that the legal drinking age should be lowered
National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 - requires that States prohibit persons under 21 years of age from purchasing or publicly possessing alcoholic beverages as a condition of receiving State highway funds. A Federal regulation that interprets the Act excludes from the definition of "public possession," possession "for an established religious purpose; when accompanied by a parent, spouse or legal guardian age 21 or older; for medical purposes when prescribed or administered by a licensed physician, pharmacist, dentist, nurse, hospital or medical institution; in private clubs or establishments; or to the sale, handling, transport, or service in dispensing of any alcoholic beverage pursuant to lawful employment of a person under the age of twenty-one years by a duly licensed manufacturer, wholesaler, or retailer of alcoholic beverages"
Purchase - to acquire by the payment of money or other consideration.
Consume - to eat or drink up or absorb
Possession - the state of having, owning, or controlling something
Legal Drinking Age - Refer to NMDA (though some states allow for exceptions, this debate will only consider the legal drinking age in any state or territory of the United States to be 21)
Alcohol - alcohol, or any beverage containing more than one-half of one percent of alcohol by volume, which is capable of use for beverage purposes, either alone or when diluted. Beer, Wines, Spirits, Liquor are all considered alcoholic drinks
Burden of Proof is on Pro/For to argue why 21 should be the standard
Both sides must support any statement relating to statistical or empirical arguments with a citation from a verified source. (ie: most drunk driving accidents occur under the age of 21)
Pro/For must state in initial argument why the age 21 is relevant to the discussion
Con/Against can only argue for ages that are lower than 21, but can dispute why age 21 is relevant to the discussion
Con/Against does not have to prove that any age lower than 21 is "better"
Round 1- is Considerations and acceptance.
Round 2 - Pro and Con will give their arguments
Round 3 - Pro and Con will support initial arguments from Round 1, one additional argument can be introduced and supported if either side desires
Round 4 - Rebuttals from Pro and Con, no new arguments or supports can be made; only rebuttals of rounds 1 and 2. A final defense/summation at the end of your Rebuttals.
I hope this will be an enlightening discussion, I hope to learn and expand my knowledge on debating and hope both sides approach this topic respectfully
John_Royals forfeited this round.
Will you continue the debate?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro concedes the debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.