is this a REBUTTAL OR ARGUMENT STATEMENT?

Question

iam doing a case about dr. kevorkian at school...iam the defense..i have to tell why what dr kevorkian did was not considered homocide to his patients (dont ask why or dnt go against it, the teacher made us do this assignment..thank u

Think about it, every doctor has a hard time trying to save their patients from death or from a terminally ill patient. Then what are you going to do after you fail and cant save the humans life. Why does our government have the right to determine our wishes on death. Hell they already run how we live. The police can determine our death, with the electric chair.. And what about God. God gave us life, and God can take it away when every God feels like it. Yes God had secured his powers not to interfere with humans lives. Unlike Dr. Kevorkian, his patients want to die. Look and Thomas Youk he had ALS Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. it’s a disease that causes muscle weakness, were you can function your body easily. Thomas had this pain, and there was no cure for it. So which would you rather choose, trying to save a patients life, by using so much technology and so much antibiotics and wasting so much blood, and then after all that you fail to save the patients life or would you choose to end your life in a fast way without suffering most of your going suspect.

Answer 1

Last time you posted a question you didn't make it clear but it appears that you are defending Dr. Kevorkian and his charges are homicide. But I can't tell you if it is a rebuttal because a rebuttal would be directly confronting an issue that the prosecution brought up after you already made an arguement and you want a chance to address the new things that have been brought up. I think it's great that you are chosing a challenging role by defending him. I come from Oregon, the only state that doctor assisted suicide is legal and the arguements we have are that:
What is the difference between the "act" of "pulling the plug" on life support when the patient had an advance directive for a DNR if they were terminal and had no chance of surviving; and the "act" of "writing a prescription" to a patient that has chosen to terminate their life when they have no chance of surviving? The only difference I can see is that one patient is consciously making the decision in the present and the other patient made the decision before they were unconscious. If this is a legal battle, try to leave god out of it as much as possible. Try to use logic and facts and use god as a last resort. Using god looks political and not legal. Good luck.

If terminating life support is not considered homicide then why is writing a prescription homicide? The acts, "actus raeus" and the mental state, "mens rae" are the same in both circumstances.

Answer 2

Mostly argument -- some bits are preemptive rebuttal -- framing the issues about capitol punishment so that they support your argument.

Rebuttal is dealing with the statements the other side made -- or is going to make (preemptively). Argument is your side.