Drinking Age Article Rebuttal

Running head: Drinking Age Article Rebuttal

Drinking Age Article Rebuttal
Crystal Sircelj
                      BCOM/275-Business Communications and Critical Thinking
                                February 6, 2012
                                                              Daniel Rowe
Drinking Age Article Rebuttal
      The stance that the organization, National Youth Rights Association (NYRA), takes on lowering the drinking age is worrisome in the sense that the outcome of such an action would be devastating to young adults. This “argument” based on emotion has little credibility in the determination of lowering the drinking age. One may consider the use of emotion in persuading others to see why the drinking age should be lowered. This fallacy is dressed as an argument and lacks the credibility and validity to support lowering the drinking age.
      The NYRA notes that the youth population has become a scapegoat and is ostracized from society and on how to spend their free time because the youth population cannot drink until the age of 21 (National Youth Rights Association, n.d.).   This does not provide credible evidence to support changing the current drinking age. Even though the law states that the drinking age is 21, adolescents are still finding ways to break the law. According to National Institutes of Health (NIH) (2007), “underage alcohol consumption over the past decade remain at unacceptably high levels,” (p. 1). Underage consumption continues to occur even with laws and programs in place to warn of the potential dangers that occur at a young age
      The NYRA uses rhetorical devices that reduce the credibility of the information given. This article downplays the youth population to appear not worthy because they cannot consume alcohol.   NYRA (n.d.) notes “the drinking age makes clear that no matter how hard you work, no matter how successful you are, you are still a second-class citizen unfit for association with adults until you...