In 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. delivered a speech known as "Beyond Vietnam-A Time to Break Silence" at Riverside Church in New York city to argues that American participation in the Vietnam War is immoral and detrimental. He effectively supports his argument by presenting a personal experience, addressing the opinions of those who oppose him, and making use of vivid language.
The first piece of evidence for King's ability to make a powerful argument lies in the story about his interactions with young people in "the ghettoes of the North". He reveals that when he talked to them about his "conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action", he was unable to answer their question, "what about Vietnam? ". This personal story helps King convey his message in a more relatable way because if the readers face the same question, they will also be incapable of giving a convincing reply. Moreover, the anecdote makes the readers wonder: what if their children also ask the same question and then, how are they supposed to give a right response. From such thoughts, the readers find it easier to relate to the author's view, and they are more likely to find his argument convincing. This result establishes a baseline for the readers to later agree with King that the American government should stop its involvement in Vietnam War.