Prop 8: Why arguments for “equality” fail.

Ben Brewster’s argument (second article) shows how many things are seen as immoral in society. After naming those things he shows that those people do not have the “fundamental rights” to do what they want. He makes his point in saying that not everyone has “fundamental rights”. The audience to which he is speaking to is the citizens who are able to vote for or against proposition 8. His argument is effective for anyone who cares enough to educate themselves about this proposition. Brewster’s use of questions helps to get the reader thinking and pulls them into the article. He also appeals to the reader’s sense of right and wrong. Even though much of his argument is true, it is not backed by hard evidence. His ethical and emotional appeals are stronger than his logical appeals. The way in which Brewster writes is very persuasive because he knows how to connect common sense with emotions and morals.


1 Comment

  1. Good analysis of the article. Maybe explain more about what Brewster identifies as fundamental rights and the different people who have them and who do not. Summarizing the argument more would be helpful, but overall very good and very informative.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s