ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Human Trafficking

785 Words4 Pages

The arrangement of my argument, in retrospect, is actually quite weak. The second and third paragraphs of the paper should have been rearranged and combined into one. The second paragraph of my essay does not even make a clear assertion. Instead of making a clear assertion and giving data to support it I ramble on for a few lines about how the People’s Republic of China became a part of the United Nations. Although the data in this paragraph is accurate, it is not clear how it relates to the topic until the very last line. “The People’s Republic of China effectively replaced the Republic of China, implying acceptance of the United Nations charter and policies.” (2) Even then the overall position of this paragraph is weak and needs something …show more content…

“’The UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons includes “organ removal” and its subsequent sale as an end purpose of trafficking. Article 3 of the U.N. Trafficking Protocol that defines trafficking in persons, clearly includes trafficking for the purpose of removal of organs.’” (2) In this paragraph there is no clear assertion made by me at the beginning, only an implied assertion in the quote. This is a weak choice because it leaves too much room for interpretation, and undermines my credibility by not making my own assertion. Throughout this paragraph I gratuitously over use quotes, effectively covering my own voice on the matter, and muddling my point. Although the quotes are solid data to make an assertion on I never actually make one. I simply rifle off disjointed quotes in hopes that the audience somehow knows how to put them all together in the larger context of the argument. Near the end of the paragraph I make a statement that “China has made revisions to their laws on organ harvesting/transplant” (2). This statement has no data for backing within the paragraph. The data to support the statement is given later in the paper. This is confusing for the audience, and is poor organization of the argument overall. This paragraph, as I said before, should have been combined with the second paragraph, and restructured using less quotes and more of my own

Open Document