When
President Obama first ran for office, in 2008, he stated that he was against
homosexual marriage. When he ran for
office again, in 2012, he changed his mind and said that he was totally for
homosexual marriage. This article,
really only gives an overview on the fact that Obama is trying to legalize gay marriage
now and that in the past, he rejected it due to his “religious faith”, but now
his ideas have “evolved”. Its purpose is
to show how Obama has changed, showing statistics of people for and against gay
marriage for some years. Nobody really
seems to question why Obama suddenly changed his stance on the ever populating
idea of gay marriage, right before the elections.
The
writer of this article, Massimo Calabresi, seems to be on the side of same sex marriage,
bringing up quotes of people who adore appealing to pathos. There are many quotes full of touchy-feely
language, making anyone who disagrees with them sound mean and ruthless. This is a bit annoying, as it is in many disagreements. The article is short and is suitably
supported for its length and purpose. It
seems though, that the writer could have pulled more from his own stand point
and not focuses so heavily on what other people think. I think that this goes with the fallacy appealing
to people of authority, trying to make the article sound more authoritive. Overall, it’s short and a passable article, not
any great work or anything.
Good analysis of the rhetorical devices. Be careful with your phrasing. There are several spots where you make grammar/usage mistakes. Don't get too light on your tone -- sometimes when we get too casual with our language, too conversational, these types of problems crop up.
ReplyDelete