英语辩论赛反方一辩开场词

第一篇：英语辩论赛反方一辩开场词

OK.Thanks my fellow debater.Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.We are glad that the definition we made about corpse donation is similar with fellow debaters’.However, I can’t agree with debaters’ opinion.We insist that upon death, each person’s body should not be given to the State for scientific use, or for organ transplant.According to this topic, what is“should be given”? Is it a forced obligation? Donation has the firstly basic principle is voluntary.And what is the voluntary principle? It refers to the dead and his family donate the corpse with voluntary.If lack of voluntary,it is not the “donation” but robbery.The followings are the reasons for our opposition.First of all, we approval that corpse donation can really meet the needs of scientific use or organ transplant.Especially for part people who require organ to transplant to save their lives, but how much is this part? In China,the current medical system is not perfect, and cost of the transplant operation is so high even more than 30,000.Besides,after operation, medicine also spent a amount of overhead.All of cost goes beyond the ability to pay for a general family.Secondly, both people and the State do not have right to violate the value with another one.Forced corpse donation on the surface is to defend the patient's right to survival, but meanwhile it destroys the right the dead and his families to choose freely.In addition,the deceased's body belongs to himself, although he died ,the right to process the corpse should be given to the deceased’s successor.That is a performance of inherited relationship.However enforced donation undoubtedly breaks the inherited system.The reason why the donation is forced is that the organ is rare and so many patients need it.Similarly,money is also need urgently,should people donate their heritage to the State? Obviously say NO!They are all voluntary donations.Without will of the parties,the donation would become robbery.If we can not control our body,where are the human rights?If we can not dominate our money freely, what is the necessity of wills? Is it a wastepaper? The State makes the law to give us rights to protect ourselves from infringement.But he prevents us to use our rights?Where is the equity? Why we can’t freely make our decisions?Who can give you the rights to robber our body without our consent?

Finally, please debaters explain to us how can the State deal with these people who don’t want to donate their bodies? Directly forced occupying without any comments? Are there not any other more moderate ways get the same effect? What is “should be given”?That is to say,people’s corpse must be given to the State after his death,no matter whether he is willing or not.Then,where are our rights?So we insist that upon death ,each person’s body should not be given to the State for scientific use or organ donation.Thank you.Yes!The value of others lives is quite precious, but personal belief does not have signification? Chinese traditional belief is that "your body is something you receive from your parents”.Even death, leaving the whole body is not just only a formality,but it represents our respect for human rights, and respect for the deceased.

第二篇：英语辩论赛反方一辩开场词

OK.Thanks my fellow debater.Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.We are glad that the definition we made about corpse donation is similar with fellow debaters’.However, I can’t agree with debaters’ opinion.We insist that upon death, each person’s body should not be given to the State for scientific use, or for organ transplant.According to this topic, what is“should be given”? Is it a forced obligation? Donation has the firstly basic principle is voluntary.And what is the voluntary principle? It refers to the dead and his family donate the corpse with voluntary.If lack of voluntary,it is not the “donation” but robbery.The followings are the reasons for our opposition.First of all, we approval that corpse donation can really meet the needs of scientific use or organ transplant.Especially for part people who require organ to transplant to save their lives, but how much is this part? In China,the current medical system is not perfect, and cost of the transplant operation is so high even more than 30,000.Besides,after operation, medicine also spent a amount of overhead.All of cost goes beyond the ability to pay for a general family.Secondly, both people and the State do not have right to violate the value with another one.Forced corpse donation on the surface is to defend the patient's right to survival, but meanwhile it destroys the right the dead and his families to choose freely.In addition,the deceased's body belongs to himself, although he died ,the right to process the corpse should be given to the deceased’s successor.That is a performance of inherited relationship.However enforced donation undoubtedly breaks the inherited system.The reason why the donation is forced is that the organ is rare and so many patients need it.Similarly,money is also need

urgently,should people donate their heritage to the State? Obviously say NO!They are all voluntary donations.Without will of the parties,the donation would become robbery.If we can not control our body,where are the human rights?If we can not dominate our money freely, what is the necessity of wills? Is it a wastepaper? The State makes the law to give us rights to protect ourselves from

infringement.But he prevents us to use our rights?Where is the equity? Why we can’t freely make our decisions?Who can give you the rights to robber our body without our consent?

Finally, please debaters explain to us how can the State deal with these people who don’t want to donate their bodies? Directly forced occupying without any comments? Are there not any other more moderate ways get the same effect? What is “should be given”?That is to say,people’s corpse must be given to the State after his death,no matter whether he is willing or not.Then,where are our rights?So we insist that upon death ,each person’s body should not be given to the State for scientific use or organ donation.Thank you.Yes!The value of others lives is quite precious, but personal belief does not have signification? Chinese traditional belief is that "your body is something you receive from your parents”.Even death, leaving the whole body is not just only a formality,but it represents our respect for human rights, and respect for the deceased.

第三篇：辩论赛一辩开场

谢谢主席，大家好。我是正方一辩。来自----我方的观点是在创业的过程中人脉比技术更加的重要！创业就是创业者对自己拥有的资源或通过努力能够拥有的资源进行优化整合，从而创造出更大经济或社会价值的过程。在社会学中人际关系被定义为人们在生产或生活活动过程中所建立的一种社会关系。心理学将人际关系定义为人与人在交往中建立的直接的心理上的联系。中文常指人与人交往关系的总称，也被称为“人际交往”。从上述的定义不难看出人际关系本身便是建立在生产和生活活动，而我们的创业本身便是一种便是一种生产生活活动。我方认为在创业过程中是人脉重要还是技术重要我们完全可以以在创业所用的时间、创业过程所经历的难题、创业最终成功与否来决定。我方认为创业人脉比技术更为重要，其理由有； 第一点：在创业初期我们便要面对着比如资金、项目、市场等困难。而这些条件都是需要我们与外界交流，不是我们单纯靠能力便能解决的，因为市场瞬息万变等你在天时，地利，人和等方面认为准备充分的时候市场又有了很大的变化。在现在21世纪我们的信息传递方式已经十分的便捷了，但便捷的同时并不代表这我们能够随时取到我们有用的信息着。而当我们有了足够的人脉后这些信息便能够随时的关注到。这些可不是只靠工作能力强就能办到的！第二点； 相信大家在平时做小组作业的时候都有一种感觉，就是自己闭门做车不管是怎么的努力到最后却依然是失败。而这个时候便需要一个组长，他也许并不能做多少事情，但是当有了他以后事情便有了合理的分工。这样不需要每个人都能作很多，只要你会一部分，在组长的统一协作下我们就有了一个完整的作品。而这个和我们创业的过程是想通的，我们并不需要有多么大的能力，但是我们必定需要有足够的人脉能够协调统一，集合大家的能力。第三点； 就是我们的一些长辈他们的成功创业，无不都经营着完善丰富的人脉也正是这些人脉成就了他们的成功。曾任美国某大铁路公司总裁的史密斯说：“铁路的95％是人，5％是铁。”美国钢铁大王及成功学大师卡耐基经过长期研究得出结论说：“专业知识在一个人成功中的作用只占15％，而其余的85％则取决于人际关系。”所以说，无论你从事什么职业，学会处理人际关系，掌握并拥有丰厚的人脉资源，你就在成功路上走了85％的路程，在个人幸福的路上走了99％的路程了。无怪乎美国石油大王洛克菲勒说：“我愿意付出比天底下得到其他本领更大的代价来获取与人相处的本领。” 综上所述，我方认为，奥运商业化利大于弊。谢谢各位！

第四篇：电力企业辩论赛反方一辩

反方一辩：感谢主席，各位评委，对方辩友，大家好！

我方提出的观点是供电企业维权不能保障供、用电双方的合法权益。

电力是维系国民经济发展的经济命脉之一，是经济发展的源动力、社会的稳定剂，是生产、生活的必需品，连续可靠的供电是供电企业应尽的责任，“以客户为中心”的服务是供电企业应该遵守的原则。但是，供电企业在维权过程中为维护本企业自身的利益采取了一系列措施，如对欠费客户停电。供电企业只是为了维护自身的经济利益，暂停了对用电客户的服务，侵犯了用电客户的权益，没有尽到应尽的职责，直接或间接的影响了企业和人们的生产、生活的需求。由此可见，供电企业维权不能保障供、用电双方的合法权益。

我方对于正方辩友提出的观点深表怀疑。经济发展，电力先行，作为国家支柱产业的供电企业依法维权是无可非议的，但维权是否能保障双方的合法权益，我方持反对观点。现实生活中，供电企业的维权还是从维护供电企业自身利益出发的，并没有保证供、用电双方的合法权益。我们可以从以下两个例子来得到验证：

一、客户拖欠电费时，供电企业将会对客户采取停电催费措施，但停电往住会给用电客户造成诸多不便，甚至是经济损失，侵犯了用电客户的权益。对方辩友称供电企业维权保障了供、用电双方的合法权益，供电企业停电催费，这样的维权能保障供、用电双方的合法权益吗？

二．某一客户的电能计量装置发生故障，少计电量，供电企业理应承担少计电量的损失。而实际上，供电企业为了维护自身的权益，却要求用电客户补交电费，这样的维权能保障供、用电双方的合法权益吗？

电力是特殊的商品已是不争的事实，居民掏钱买电、供电公司收费后向居民供应电力，并提供一系列的相关服务。作为电力销售者——供电公司理所当然应为消费者提供质量合格的电力及服务，保障用电客户的合法权益。但是，随着供电企业不断增强维权意识，制定和完善规范供、用双方权利与义务的相关管理办法和制度，使用电客户被供电企业的某些用电条款约束。面对用电客户拖欠电费，出现用电故障等问题时，供电企业只是通过维权手段维护自身的权益，解决和应对遇到的问题，而没有通过维权来维护供、用电双方的合法权益。

因此，我方认为“供电企业维权不能保障供、用电双方的合法权益”。谢谢大家！

第五篇：反方一辩陈词

反方一辩陈词

谢谢主席，尊敬的评委老师，可爱的对方辩友，在座的同学们，大家好！对方辩友的发言可谓是滔滔不绝，但我方并不能苟同。我方认为：拥有美貌弊大于利。美貌，也就是指人美丽的容颜。在这里我方要强调的是：拥有美貌，不等于拥有了美。我方并不否认美貌所给我们带来的像在求职、交际等方面的好处，但我们今天讨论的标准，是以人为中心，以人的得失来讨论的。遍观现实，我们发现过度追求美貌于自身存在很大的弊端，具体理由如下：

第一：过度追求美貌易导致很多人在人生追求上本末倒置，忽视能力和内在美的培养。当太多人为了追求美貌而花费大量精力时间而忽视内涵的提升的时候，这是一种可怕的本末倒置。姣好的容颜如果没有内涵没有气质作为源泉，再美的容颜也是一副空皮囊。现实中，我们看到多少模特花了大量时间追求天使面庞魔鬼身材，却连基本文化素质都保证不了。对于一个女人来说，这不是真的美，当有一天岁月流逝青春不再，我们终究会后悔当年对于美貌的过分的爱。第二：拥有美貌给我们带来了太多不必要的痛苦和烦恼。古时女子因美貌选入后宫，以为就此荣华富贵可大多却寂寞一生，是美貌让她们寂寞了一世。而今日呢，多少人为了拥有美貌去做整容而发生不可逆转的恶果，多少明星因为拥有美貌而遭遇到潜规则，多少女性因为自己拥有了美貌而对自身定位过高，在婚姻爱情上不肯妥协最终成为剩女，甚至于那些既有美貌又有能力的女人也无法幸免，当你凭自身实力攀登的时候却被人误认为是靠容貌不是实力，你甘心吗？

第三：当今社会对于美貌的追捧带来了也带来了很多弊端。韩国小姐选举，把各个佳丽的照片摆在一起，哇塞，真的好像是一个人在选举哎~社会大众对美貌的普遍追捧整容成风，可只有瓜子脸大眼睛高鼻梁大众长一张脸才算美貌吗？再者，社会对美貌的追捧兴起了很多美丽产业，带来了很大的经济效益，但这种经济效益的背后是引起人们价值观念的错漏，使得吃青春饭的女孩子越来越多。可是江山代有才人出啊，纵然拥有像“甘露露”那样的美貌出的了像她一样大的名，又能有多长久呢？再弱弱的问一句，美貌所带来这种名声这种行业，真的干净吗？

今天虽然讨论拥有美丽弊大于利，但我方并不是排斥美貌，大家可以看到我方除了一辩同学之外都很漂亮，我们是想提醒大家在美丽面前要保持清醒的头脑，不必刻意追求，保持自己的风格，不被盲目的追求冲昏头脑。因为，你本来就很美。综上所述，我方坚持认为：拥有美貌弊大于利。