Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on same sex marriage in the u.s
Essay on same sex marriage in the u.s
Ethics of same sex marriage
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on same sex marriage in the u.s
Same-sex marriage has been one of the most controversial topics in the United States, and gay couples have been facing harsh judges by others. Gay marriage is very important because it challenges our values on freedom, and this will affect the next generation’s understanding of marriage. In “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage,” the author uses historical facts trying to convince his audience that same-sex marriage should be protected under laws and granted respect by people. On the other hand, the author of “Prop 8 Hurts My Family-ask Me How” uses incidences of how homosexual couples are being harassed and discriminated by others to show how they were unequally treated after prop 8 was passed. They both use the rhetorical strategies effectively …show more content…
The purpose of the cartoon is to make the audiences to question why same-sex marriage is disrespected even traditional marriage could involve adultery, it make same-sex marriage more reasonable to get the same rights. In “why same-sex marriage is an American value,” the author inserted a cartoon of two mem in a restaurant asking the waiter for wine that support gay marriage. By adding this picture to his writing, it helps the writer to demonstrate gay couples’ attitude toward gay marriage, it shows that gay couples are taking their marriage seriously. Furthermore, the two writings have different stances, in “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage,” the author used a serious and logical tone, and he feels that the American marriage system is dysfunctional. This can be proven by his uses of the emotional dictions such as “irrational” and “discriminatory” (82). And Marriage Equality USA used a more compassionate and fearful tone to demonstrate the threat same-sex couples are facing. Because he wants the audience to feel afraid for they are living such an unsafe environment, so gay couples would help each other and stand up for their civil rights. At last, they both have the same type of genre, which is informative and …show more content…
However, they have different uses of rhetorical appeals in their writing, and this makes a difference in trustworthiness of these writings. In my perspective, the writing techniques used in “The conservative Case for Gay Marriage” are better than the other, because he used mainly logos while the other use more of pathos. Logos is more effective in persuasive writing because people are more willing to believe logical facts rather than an intention to draw emotional
Logos is a persuasive tool used to determine the logic within an argument. What evidence does the writer have for the position he or she has taken. In Wal-Mart vs. Pyramids, Carlsen des...
Some of the great philosophers known to man, Aristotle and Plato, wanted the ability to persuade. Aristotle wanted to be able to persuade people with a good amount of time, wisdom, and knowledge so that people could see the good of something. His student, Plato, wanted to be able to persuade people quickly and more affectively by persuading them in a very short time frame. So in order to quickly persuade people, Plato proposed an argument by expressing an idea and supporting it with rhetorical evidence. From Plato’s teaching came three types of rhetorical evidence; logos, which argues by logic; pathos, which argues by the use of sympathy and empathy; and ethos, which argues by the use of ethical appeals. Today the three types of rhetorical analysis can be found everywhere in everyday life. Just like Plato, ad writers who produce TV commercials want to persuade people in a short amount of time. These ad writers have to persuade the view point of their audience in about 30 seconds to a minute in time. In 2010, during Super Bowl XLIV, a commercial by Audi was premiered. This Audi commercial is a great example of the use of the three types of rhetorical evidence; logos, pathos, and ethos.
“Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” proves more effective because it creates more fear and worry in the audience, meanwhile “The Speech in the Virginia Convention” attempts to spark a need for liberty in the intended audience. Not to say that “The Speech in the Virginia Convention” becomes any less effective because of persuasion used in the piece, it’s just not as effective as “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”. Both pieces get their points across quite well, but in the end “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” proves to be more effective for the intended audience than “The Speech in the Virginia Convention”.
In all of these writings they have the same genre of being argumentative. Genres connect the audience to the writing and helps them know what the author is trying to perceive. At first, specific genres help attract a certain audience to the writing and then once attracted to a certain genre it can help the audience recognize what they are about to read. To someone that is attracted to argumentative
For most writers, we must know the different types of argumentation styles along with logical fallacies. There are three main types of argumentation styles including: Aristotelian, Rogerian, and Toulmin. All three styles have their own argumentation spin on arguments. Aristotelian refutes the opposing claim while at the same time promoting its own argument by using supporting evidence. Some of that evidence includes using rhetorical appeals such as ethos, logos, and pathos. A Rogerian arguments are the arguments that find the common ground in order for an effective argument. Last but not least there is the Toulmin argument, the Toulmin argument is similar to the Aristotelian argument yet instead of appealing to the audience Toulmin focuses
He also discusses how love and the desire for commitment play a big part in the argument for and against gay marriage. Stoddard begins his argument successfully with pathos, or emotional appeal, to attain the reader’s empathy for those who have been deprived of a loved one. The story tells of a woman named Karen Thompson, who was basically married, but not legally, to her female partner; when Thompson’s partner was in a critical car accident, her partner’s parents completely cut Thompson off from all contact with their daughter. Had the two women been married, they would not have had to deal with such heart-throbbing pain. This example is effective in presenting how marriage “can be the key to survival, emotional and financial” (Stoddard, 1988, p. 551).
The constitutional right of gay marriage is a hot topic for debate in the United States. Currently, 37 states have legal gay marriage, while 13 states have banned gay marriage. The two essays, "What’s Wrong with Gay Marriage?" by Katha Pollitt and "Gay "Marriage": Societal Suicide" by Charles Colson provide a compare and contrast view of why gay marriage should be legal or not. Pollitt argues that gay marriage is a constitutional human right and that it should be legal, while Colson believes that gay marriage is sacrilegious act that should not be legal in the United States and that “it provides a backdrop for broken families and increases crime rates” (Colson, pg535). Both authors provide examples to support their thesis. Katha Pollitt provides more relevant data to support that gay marriage is a constitutional right and should be enacted as law in our entire country, she has a true libertarian mindset.
...to interpret the material up to the reader, but the use of these appeals help persuade the audience member to think a certain way. These analytical tools prove just how effective and in depth writers go into their material to make their work come across more powerful and influential, and each of these authors did just that.
Gay rights has always been a controversial issue in Russia. Russia has anti-gay laws that cause big conflict in the country. Some of the laws that were passed include the gay propaganda law which is against exposing children to any gay media. Another big law which is on its way to being passed is they law against gay people adopting children. Because of this big issue going on, Fareed Zakaria a CNN news reporter investigates the situation. Zakaria interviews Valery Gergiev, an artistic and general director of Mariinsky Theatre. Zakaria makes sure to get Gergiev's point of view on the situation. By asking for Gergiev’s opinion, he is hoping it will gain the people of Russia’s attention. Gergiev states “I myself question very much why the country needed something like this law” which shows that he believes the new law is unnecessary. Gregiev also says. “ I myself hate any form of discrimination. I would never allow any sort of discrimination to take place”. By Zakaria asking this, he is trying to persuade the audience that discrimination will rise from this new law and gay people will no longer be treated equally.
When you look at the books closely together, you can see how alike they are. Both authors use many analogies to get their points across. For example, Eboo used the Martin Luther King Jr. and George Washington analogy. King knew Washington was a slaveholder, and a symbol of democracy, and it “Neither paralyzed him nor made him cynical.” Both the essays also use repetition with words and phrases such as, “What is the point?”
Rather, more multiple categorized differences are confirmed with various dimensions. By applying the concept of “intersectionality” to the present social situations, the right of the same-sex marriage can be given as an another example. In regard to this, the subject’s identities are subdivided into the multiple existing frameworks, and the aggregation of these characters establishes one unique personality. The examples of what makes people separate from “others” are seen in the dissimilarities of their sex, age, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, and their geographical position, and these categories construct the different personal experiences and standpoints. For example, In Japan, the gay marriage is not authorized under the current law. Also, the amount of exposure about the LGBT in the media is still low, thus a subordinate social movements are not active. As a result, heterosexual people do not recognize the existence of the minority group, and even if they recognize it, people do not try to focus on the situation of them. Thus, the gender minority people are still in the positions of weak. On the other hand, in The USA, the same-sex marriage is legalized, and generally speaking, as a result of the legalization, the LGBT people have more access to the social life like heterosexual people have. This comparison indicates that due to their geographical location,
From the two prompts of "Prop 8 Hurt My Family-Ask Me How" and Theodore B. Olson's "The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage", the second article provides a deeper and more rational attempt on explaining why gay marriage is an essential right for every individual to acquire, and is also the ultimate sign of American Principle. Unlike the first prompt, which mainly consists of emotional appeal, Theodore B. Olson uses logical and ethical rhetorical strategies to convey the reader of his viewpoint. Coming from a standpoint of it not being a "liberal or conservative issue, but an American one."(82)
the beginning the text has an exciting tone since the authors describe the overwhelming emotions of individuals as well as the celebrations that took place after the law allowing same sex marriage was approved. By starting the article in this manner the writers are trying to provoke feelings of excitement from their readers in order to make them think that this event is a positive aspect of our society. Also, by mentioning the gay movement’s multiple efforts over the past “forty-two years to ensure the marital as well as civil rights of homosexuals” (Virtanen, Hill, and Zraick 1), the writers motivate their audience to be sympathetic towards these individuals. Moreover, the authors try to make people become more suppo...
What is wrong with gay marriage? That is the question writer Katha Pollit asks in her essay “What’s Wrong with Gay Marriage?”. The essay is clearly intended for people who are against gay marriage. The title alone shows that she does not understand why people think gay marriage is wrong. Pollitt’s audience must have different reasons for being against gay marriage. This is why she addresses the main reasons why people may think gay marriage is wrong. Pollitt talks about how people believe marriage is about procreation and tries to convince them they are wrong. Pollit says “As many have pointed out, the law permits marriage to the infertile.” She also talks about marriage being a way for women to domesticate men. Pollit says “although it overlooks
In Evan’s Two Moms, Anna Quindlen incorporates ethos, pathos and logos to gain the readers’ trustworthiness and for them to agree on the way she feels about gay marriage. Also, her structure and tone show the reader that she has planned her argument and ties in court cases to support her argument. Quindlens’ tone and language also helps the reader to comprehend Quindlens’ argument and point that if two people are in love, no matter their sex, they should be able to live the same lifestyle as any other spouse.