Proposition: Resolved: “That Death Penalty be Restored”

Type of Debate: Modified Oregon-Oxford

Divisions of Speeches in a Debate

a) Necessity- (First Speaker) Is it urgently needed? Inevitable? A requirement? Demand? Does the fate of
the country depend on it?
b) Beneficiality- (Second Speaker) Is it useful? Helpful? Profitable? Advantageous? Would we gain? Can
we save time, effort, money?
c) Practicability- (Third Speaker) Can it be done? Is it possible? Is it workable? Is it feasible?

Burden of Proof Vs. Burden of Refutal

a) Affirmative side is vested the burden of the PROOF (presentation of evidence)
b) Negative Side is vested the burden of REFUTAL (presentation of counter-evidence).
c) In no case shall one side assume the designation of another in a debate. Once this is committed the
Fallacy of Shifting the Burden of Proof may be raised during the Rebuttal.

Debate Arrangement
 First Affirmative (Necessity) - Constructive Speech 3 min.
 First Negative – Interpellation of the first affirmative speaker 3 min.
 First Negative (Non- Necessity) - Constructive Speech 3 min.
 First Affirmative – Interpellation of the second negative speaker 3 min.

 Second Affirmative (Beneficiability) – Constructive Speech 3 min.

 Second Negative – Interpellation of the second affirmative speaker 3 min.
 Second Negative (Non-Beneficiability) – Constructive Speech 3 min.
 Second Affirmative – Interpellation of the second negative speaker 3 min.

 Third Affirmative (Practicability) – Constructive Speech 3 min.

 Third Negative – Interpellation of the third affirmative speaker 3 min.
 Third Negative (Non-Practicability) - Constructive Speech 3 min.
 Third Affirmative – Interpellation of the third negative speaker 3 min.

 Team Captain Affirmative – Rebutal Speech 3 min.

 Team Captain Negative – Rebutal Speech 3 min.

Issues on the Debate:

a. Whether or not it is Necessary? (Necessity)
b. Whether or not it is Beneficial? (Beneficiality)
c. Whether or not it is Practical? (Practicability)

Rules and Guidelines on Debate

Rule and Regulations

1. The moderator’s decision is final.
2. Observe proper time limits.
a. Constructive speech- 7 minutes
b. Interpellation- 5 minutes
c. Rebutal Speech- 5 minutes
 3. Wrangling is strictly prohibited.
4. Qualifications and Objections must be addressed to the moderator.
5. Proper decorum must always be observed.
6. The rules on evidence shall be put unto effect.

Any violation of the above mentioned rules and guidelines shall be dealt with by corresponding point
deductions depending on the recommendation of the moderator who shall weight the gravity of the offense.

Role of the Moderator

The moderator of the debate has the following duties:
1. To reveal the issue involve the debate;
2. To rule on points of clarification about the issues or questions and answers made during the
Interpellation; and
3. To see to it that the debate is orderly and follows the rules of parliamentary procedures.
Role of the Timer:
1. To time the speakers and debaters accurately;
2. To give the speakers a one-minute warning with the ringing of the bell once before his/her time is up.
3. To prevent the debaters from exceeding the time allotted to them by ringing the bell twice.
Criteria for Judging
a. Evidence - 25%
b. Delivery - 30%
c. Interpellation - 30%
d. Rebuttal - 15%

The judges, based on their discretion, shall have the authority to determine who will be the Best Speaker and
Best Debater. The winning team shall be determined by the majority decision of the Board of Judges.
Types of Constructive Speech may be:
a. Reading Method
b. Memory Method
c. Extemporaneous
d. Mix method of memory and conversational or dramatic
Poise, gestures, audience contact and voice projection are highly recommended.

Prepared by:

DIOSDADO P. ESTIMADA, Ph. D.

Faculty, CAS Dept.

Helpful Tips for the Debaters (Note below are not part of the Rules and Regulations of the Debate)
Tips on Asking Question:
1. Ask a short Q designed to get a short A.
2. Indicate the object of your Q.
3. Don't telegraph your argument, don't make it too obvious.
4. Don't ask Q they won't answer properly."So, we win, right?"
5. Make Q seem important, even if it is just an attempt to clarify.
6. Politeness is a must -- emphasize the difference if they are rude.
7. Approach things from a non-obvious direction. Then trap them.
8. Mark your flow/notes as to what you want to question them about.
9. Avoid open ended Qs unless you are sure they are clueless.
10. Face the judge/audience, not your opponent.
11. CX answers must be integrated into your arguments made during a speech.
Guideline for Answering Question:
1. Concise A.
2. Refer to something you have already said whenever possible. This is safe.
3. Answer based on your position in the debate so far. Keep options open.
4. Don't make promises of what you or your partner will do later.
5. Qualify your answers.
6. Be willing to exchange documents read into the debate.
7. Answer only relevant questions.
8. Address the judge.
9. Try and not answer hypothetical Q. If they demand, say you will give a hypothetical A.
10. Signal each other, don't tag-team.
11. Don't say"I don't know,"say"I am not sure at this time....
Rules on Interpellation:
1. Questions should primarily focused on arguments developed in the speech of your opponent. However,
matters relevant and material to the proposition are admissible.
2. Questioner and opponent should treat each other with courtesy.
3. Both speakers stand and face the audience during the question or Interpellation period.
4. Once the questioning has begun, neither the questioner nor his opponent may consult a colleague.
Consultation should be done before but as quietly as possible.
5. Questioners should ask brief and easily understandable question. Answers should equally be brief.
Categorical questions answerable by yes or no is allowed, however, opponent if he choose, may qualify
his answer why yes or why no.
6. Questioner may not cut off a reasonable and qualifying answer, but he may cut off a nervous response
with a statement such as a “thank you” “that is enough information” or “your point is quite clear” or
“I’m satisfied.”
7. A questioner should not comment on the response of his opponent.
8. Your opponent may refuse to answer ambiguous, irrelevant or loaded questions by asking the questioner
to rephrase or reform his question.
Rules on Rebuttal Speech:
a. Rebuttal speaker should point out clearly the fallacies committed by his opponent stating clearly what
particularly statement or argument constitute said fallacy.
b. If not familiar with the fallacies of logic, the debater may counter arguments directly by stating what
arguments or statement is incorrect or false.
Other Helpful Tips on Rebuttal:
1. Avoid repetition. Don't just repeat your constructive arguments. Beat the other team's arguments and tell
the judge why your arguments are better.
2. Avoid passing ships. Don't avoid what the other team said. You must clash directly with their responses.
3. Avoid reading evidence only. You must be explaining and telling the judge why these issues win the
debate.
4. Avoid rereading evidence that has already been read in constructive. You can make reference to it by
referring to it, but don't re-read it.
5. Avoid “lumping and dumping."Don't try to go for everything. You can't make 12 responses to each
argument in a few minutes.
6. Be organized. Don't jump from issue to issue at random. Be specific and logical about winning issues.
7. Don't be a blabbering motor mouth. Speak quickly but not beyond your ability. If you speak too fast,
you will stumble and not get through as much.
8. Don't whine to the judge about fairness or what the other team might have done that you think is
unethical. Make responses and beat them.
9. Don't make new arguments. You can read new evidence but you can't run new disadvantages or
topicality responses. You are limiting to extending the positions laid out in the constructive speeches.
10. Use signposting. Make sure the judge knows where you are on the flow sheet. This is not the time to
lose the judge on the flow.
11. Use issue packages. Organize your arguments into issue packages. Choose arguments which you want
to win. Don't go for everything. Extend those arguments that you need to win.
12. Cross-apply arguments. If you dropped an argument in a prior speech that you think was important don't
act like your losing. Cross-apply arguments you made somewhere else in the debate to answer it.
Types of Constructive Speech may be:
e. Reading Method
f. Memory Method
g. Extemporaneous
h. Mix method of memory and conversational or dramatic
Poise, gestures, audience contact and voice projection are highly recommended.

Illustrative Samples of Making Constructive Speech

Proposition: Resolved: That Absolute Divorce be Legalized in the Philippines

 Mr. Moderator, our dear opponents on the negative side, classmates, ladies and gentlemen:
We, on the affirmative side propose that absolute DIVORCE should be legalized here in the Philippines. We
absolutely believe that it is practical, necessary and beneficial to apply divorce here in our country.

Practicability
As the first speaker, I believe that the legalization of absolute divorce is practicable on the following
premises:

1. It is practical to choose divorce rather than that of annulment.

Divorce is a way of dissolving a legal marriage that permits the partners to remarry if they choose. It differs
from annulment, which declares a marriage invalid because of some defect in the contract. 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 with divorce you don’t have to make stories, just tell them
the real reason then leave them to their hands. (You need to present court records/evidences to prove this
allegation.)

2. It is written in the Bible

According to the Bible itself, Deuteronomy 24:1 tells us the following: “When a man takes a wife and
marries her, if then she finds no favour in her eyes because he has found some indecency in her he therefore
writes her a bill of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house.” This biblical passage is
without doubt the words of God. This implies that even God permits divorce.
(You need to present the Bible as evidence to prove what you say)

3. According to the Constitution

The church should not have any interference with the law and therefore should allow the legalization of the
bill divorce. According to the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, Article II Declaration of
Principles and State Policies, Section 2 states that “the separation of Church and state shall be inviolable.”
(You need to present the 1987 Constitution to support your statement)

4. Issues on Physical and Emotional Abuse

It is a grave threat among our society on the mushrooming of issues about battered wives; physically
and emotionally abused wives. It is about time that we should wake up to our senses and find out a way to solve
this
Under the foregoing premises, we therefore, resolved that the absolute divorce should be legalized and
applied in the Philippines on the basis of its practicability. (You need to present data/court records to prove
this allegation)
Mr. Moderator, I am now ready for interpellation.