Be Grateful for Life

Summary: In a New York Times article, Kerby Anderson, the president of Probe Ministries International, wrote an essay about Arguments Against Abortion. There are four sets of arguments against abortion. It includes biblical, medical, legal, and philosophical arguments. Many bible verses are included in this article and it has an Old Testament legal code included here also. In Exodus 21:22-25, it appears to say that the same fine is applied to the born and the unborn. For medical arguments, it talks about it pain wise and heart wise. In legal arguments, it talks about the Roe v. Wade, the burden proof, when in doubt, don’t, and the Hippocratic Oath. Philosophical arguments talks about when the baby is two days old that it would be considered and acceptable member of society.

Commentary: I agree with this article because it has all of the arguments on there and the arguments that are on there are basically what I think about abortion. In Exodus 21:22-25, it states “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely, but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, and bruise for bruise.” This basically means that what ever happens to the baby, the man has to pay for it.

Analysis: The credibility of this article is good because it is an essay that Kerry Anderson wrote. He is the president of Probe Ministries International and he is also a nationally syndicated columnist. He uses logos because he uses verses from the bible on the biblical arguments. He also uses pathos on philosophical arguments. In this article, I have not detected any fallacies.

http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/arg-abor.html

Summary: In a New York Times Article, a young male is stating the 9 reasons why abortion should be illegal. He states these reasons because in a Planned Parenthood there is a book called 9 Reasons Why Abortion Should Be Legal. So basically he is stating the oppositions of what this book has as you can see. For example, in the introduction paragraph, he says that he is against the fact of abortion and that he “strongly disagrees with their support of abortion”. He also states that Congress has passed anti-abortion bill and that it has been “vetoed by a pro-abortion liberal president”.

Commentary: I agree with this article because the article states the facts about what happens not just to the fetus but also how shaming it is to the women who abort. I think that even though this article is written by a guy, I think that he is right about what he says about abortion and how it’s wrong.

Analysis: This is information that came from a New York Times article and it also comes from Planned Parenthood’s book Planned Parenthood.  This person states the opposition of this book, in which his article is called 9 Reasons Why Abortion Should Be Illegal. He uses pathos because this is what he feels about abortion. He “strongly dislikes” abortion. He also makes points in how women who illegally abort feel. He makes it look like that women who illegally abort feel like criminals. He doesn’t use fallacies because this is the opposition of the Planned Parenthood book called 9 Reasons Why Abortion Should Be Legal. 

 <http://www.mrdata.net/books/9reasons.htm>.

Summary: In a New York Times article, the author talks about her view of abortion and how it should be illegal. In the first sentence, it says “I dislike abortion.”The fact that she dislikes abortion is to express her feeling towards abortion. On the second and third sentence, it says” I do not consider the fetus to be human or anything approaching it; it has no social attachments, no language, nothing. But it is still alive, and as a result, I don’t like the idea of killing it.” She is basically talking about what the characteristics of the fetus is. Even though the fetus is mainly non-descript, it is still a living thing and the fact of “killing it” is wrong.

Commentary: Religion wise, I am against abortion because I am Catholic and the Catholic church is against abortion. Personal wise, I am still against abortion. First of all, it is against the law to murder. Right? Also if people read or the the 10 commandments, in the 8th commandment, it says “Thou shall not kill”. So if it es against the law to kill and in the 8th commandment it says “thou shall not kill”, why do people abort? Abortion is basically the killing of a tiny infant, even though it is unborn. So basically I agree with this article with the fact that the author is against abortion.

Analysis: This is a type of article that anyone can trust because it comes from a New York Times article. The author uses pathos most of the time because she expresses her feeling about abortion. There were no fallacies in any part of the article.

“Our Opinions About Abortion.” New York Times. 29 Oct. 2007 http://www.nytimes.com.

article