This is just outrageous!

In his book "Who is For Life" Francis A. Schaeffer makes an unreasonable assumption. I would first like to introduce his opinion:

…[T]he acceptance of abortion does not end with the killing of unborn human life. It continues on to affect our attitude toward all aspects of human life. This is most obvious in how quickly, following the acceptance of abortion, comes the acceptance of infanticide―the killing of babies who after birth do not come up to someone's standard of life worthy to be lived―and then on to euthanasia of the aged. If human life can be taken before birth, there is no logical reason why human life cannot be taken after birth.
One must think logical in this situation. Ever since the beginning of time killing someone has been wrong. He is trying to make a point here that is not valid. In his first sentence he makes the claim that if we do not stop abortion now that it will continue until murder is even in essance okay. I am against aportion and disagree with it, but I would never make that second assumption because it is not fair. Especially for those people, who are for it.
In the second sentence he says that it will affect our attitude in all aspects of our lives. Abortion is not a domino affect.
It is important for each of us to learn from this. We can not assume things that have not happened before and have been a certain way for a long period of time. We can not discuss one topic and bring another one in and assume that it will support the orginal topic. Infacticide, for example, is going overboard. If he wants to talk about abortion he needs to stay on topic. Life is special and it is important that one understands that. I agree with him on this topic. But one has to understand that when a baby is born life begins in a new era.

Do you want a perfect face?

Haily Snyder wrote about Proactiv and did an audience analysis on it. I would like to discuss certain language tools used by Proactiv. Wow! I never thought about it before I was a salesman how many tatics there are in writing and in advertisment.
Proactiv uses imgery in their advertisment. It explains how beautiful one's face will become, when one uses it. On the website it states " Proactiv heals acne today, and prevents it for tomorrow". This sentence convinces one that it is a quick solution. They do this because nobody is patient enough to wait. If it said it takes a month, nobody would show much interest, therefore just by their langauge tools are they able to persaude people that it works and works quickly. When people look in the mirror and are not satisfied with what they see, an image may come into mind of a clearer better-looking face. The image of the Proactiv advertisment will appear.

It also says it heals acne "today". That means quick results. This is an overstatement. There is no way that this will work in just one day, but it just means quick results. Proactiv also says in their advertisment that " Get the clear skin you deserve". I am not sure what language tool, but this is a sales tactic. They are using ethos to let people know that they deserve good skin and that Proactiv can do that for them. It makes you assume that Proactiv is helping you,which may be true, but in reality Proactiv just wants your money.

Lehi's Discourse

Kurt has written a retorical analysis about Lehi's Discourse in 2 Nephi 2. Kurt explains how Lehi uses Logos in his speech. I would like to discuss how he uses Pathos. In the beginning of the Chapter one sees that Lehi is speaking to his son Jacob. He starts out be telling him a few things that has happened in Jacob's life and how it has helped him. Verses one and two reads, "And now, Jacob, I speak unto you: Thou art my first-born in the days of my tribulation in the wilderness. And behold, in thy childhood thou hast suffered afflictions and much sorrow... Jacob, my first-born in the wilderness, thou knowest the greatness of God; and he shall consecrate thine afflictions for thy gain". First-born can mean that one receives special rights or privledges. He tells Jacob basically that he knows it has been had for him, dealing with his brothers in the wilderness. He then states that it will be for his good. So that it will help him. He is trying to appeal to his emotions, which Lehi successfully achieves or so it seems to be that way. His son lived a righteous life. Jacob already knows that life is hard and that he is the first-born, but Lehi restates it and explains to him how good he is.

In verse three it states, "Wherefore, thy soul shall be blessed, and thou shalt dwell safely with thy brother, Nephi; and thy days shall be spent in the service of thy God. Wherefore, I know that thou art redeemed, because of the righteousness of thy Redeemer". He tells him he will be safe with his brother Nephi, who is a very righteous son of Lehi, who has been a leader for Jacob, as he was growing up. He tells Jacob that he knows that he will be redeemed through the Lord Jesus Christ. If I were Jacob I would feel special and want to listen to my father Lehi because he is declaring how good of a person I am.
Kurt explains basically the rest in his analysis to this great discourse. He explains the Logos, which Lehi used after he had used Pathos to reach his son.

Is Michael Vick still important to the NFL?

Matt Mosley goes to great lengths to write about Michael Vick. Matt Mosley is a writer for ESPN and Michael Vick is an NFL player. Why would Mosley do that? Because Michael Vick is the most talked about player in the NFL at this point in time. He is obviously using kairos. He wrote this article a week before Vick would make his first NFL appearance back in the league.

Vick has been the topic in the NFL for the last few months because of his actions in criminal law. The first question he addresses about Vick was will he be allowed to play again. Since this is now being discussed, how he will do this upcoming Sunday, Vick was obviously allowed to play and was signed by the Philidelphia Eagles.Michael Vick was released from prison a few months ago. He was there for 18 months. He was charged 18 long months because he was into so called "Dogfighting". Mosley asserts a good question, what will Vick do now that he is back in the NFL? Every true football fan is wondering how he will play in his first real game back in action. This could have been the end of Michael Vick's football career, had he not been accepted back into the NFL. Then he would not be a topic of interest, but he was and that is why Kairos is found here. Even if he wins a Super Bowl, people will still talk about how he almost was not accepted back into the NFL. It is very interesting to hear his views and predictions. It makes one wonder what will happen on Sunday when he suits up for the big game.

Mosley is going back to the fact that Vick was in trouble and then got out. Reed took him in because he had same issues with his own children as well. Mosley isn't so much referring to the fact of what Michael Vick did, as to how much h is talking about Vick's future as a player and what will happen with him. This is why Mosley did not write about Vick when he was is prison, rather now because people want to know what the future holds for him.

Michael Vick Back In Action!

Matt Mosley writes about Michael Vick and the Philadelphia Eagles. It seems he is giving reasons for Andy Reid (head coach for the Eagles) signing Vick. He uses logos to explain his major points. Michael Vick was recently released from prison for dog-fighting. He was there for eighteen months.
Matt portrays Andy Reids' motives to be out of jealousy and that is why he signed Michael Vick. Though this is a reason, it is not one that has evidence behind it. Logos can be very effective, but one needs to have significant evidences for each individual point. This can be seen logical, which agrees with logos. Another reason he gives is that Andy Reed has sons, who have been in trouble with the law and everyone needs a second chance. This point definitely has more evidence than the last one. He assumed one point and actually has evidence for the second one. He also states later in the article that Michael Vick will not be listed as the second string quarterback, therefore he is not fully prepared to be the full-time quarterback. Preparation has different meanings, but he has not talked to Reid or Vick, so he has no association with them. He then goes so far to say that Andy Reed signed Vick only because his pride. That he wanted to prove his critics wrong and "rub in their face", so to say. He is another reason for signing with no actually evidence. He gives a comparison between Reid and another NFL coach, but it is not valid. In the end one must have evidences to show reasons.

The Influence of Rightous Women

In Elder Uchtdorf’s Address to the Church, he exclaims the importance of women. By using pathos he is able to reach each individual sister on a personal level. He first establishes the principle of womanhood by giving biblical examples of women such as Mary, Eve, or Elizabeth. He explains the crucial role these women play in history.
He then creates pathos by speaking directly to the women of the church. This way everyone feels like she is being spoken to. He describes women from the past above and relates to the women in the audience that they too can make a huge difference. Every person needs to feel needed, so he then asserts, “We call upon the women of the Church to stand together for righteousness. They must begin in their own homes. They can teach it in their classes. They can voice it in their communities.”
Towards the end of the introduction he expresses his love for the sisters of the church, therefore giving him credibility because each knows that he genuinely cares for each of them.
Most individuals like an invite to be better. His tone in pathos lets each sister know that she is able to achieve the Lord’s goal for her. He then gives each sister a challenge,” Sisters, your example in seemingly small things will make a big difference in the lives of our young people. The way you dress and groom yourselves, the way you talk, the way you pray, the way you testify, the way you live every day will make the difference. This includes which TV shows you watch, which music you prefer, and how you use the Internet. If you love to go to the temple, the young people who value your example will also love to go. If you adapt your wardrobe to the temple garment and not the other way around, they will know what you consider important, and they will learn from you.”
Each sister now feels the need to be better than before and change their lives. He speaks very persausive and on a personal level. He also relates special experiences he has hade over the years with significant women in his life.

None were with Him.

Elder Jeffery R. Holland picked a perfect opportunity to talk about being alone in this challenging world, inwhich we live. Why? Because everyone feels alone in certain aspects of life. In his General Conference Talk "None Were With Him" he explains the suffering that Jesus Christ went through alone and likens it to his audience. He chose this topic because everyone has felt alone before and most likely everyone, who is in the audience believes in Jesus Christ. He knows his audience and especially in the church. He states in his talk that we do not have to walk alone because he did. He addresses the Sisters in the church searching for a spouse and can not find one. He addresses the men and tells them that they need to go find them, therefore he is speaking to both parties inviting them to both do their part. Living righteously is the answer he gives to both parties and for the men to seek out these righteous women. Through righteous living we will not need to feel alone because Christ will be there for each one of us.

He exclaims that Jesus Christ alone took upon the hardest task in bringing about salvation. He stated that he had to do it alone. Through this act we are able to receive the most precious blessings such as: salvation, eternal life, resurrected body, and complete happiness. Elder Holland, being an apostle, obviously knew that this was a subject that people were struggling with at the time in their lives. He knew his audience.
At the same time Monica F. Helms argues that one can be homosexual or heterosexual and have the same relationship. She claims that one just needs somebody. Elder Holland and the LDS Church argue that this is not the case. He probably knew of some of the challenges people in the church were facing. Maybe people, in the church, who were having the problem of finding somebody of the opposite gender, wanted to give up and just find anybody. Elder Holland does not directly discuss, but explains that we need Christ and through that we will not feel alone.
Joel Stephens