Fallacies

In this article, political implications are given emphasis. To begin with, the same-sex marriages lead to a democratic disrespect. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized the point as he opposed the idea in the Supreme Court (Powell, 2015). Concerning the precedent round of litigation Hawaii, Rosenberg and Klarman’s source emphasis has been a significant negative legislative response in Congress and state capitols (Powell, 2015). Despite that, there were other bright electoral consequences as well. These electoral consequences were very but not entirely

A fallacy, by definition, is an argument that uses poor reasoning. Before one uses a fallacy, it’s important to have full understanding or else you risk losing your whole ethos aspect of your argument. Heinrichs gives three important parts to detecting fallacies. “All you have to do is look for a bad proof, the wrong number of choices, or a disconnect between the proof and the conclusion.” (Heinrichs 146)

At the time the article was first published, the push for legalizing gay unions was a controversial topic in the USA. The writer, ‘Rev. Louis P. Sheldon was at the time, the chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, a California-based organization of some 32,000 churches’ (p. 1). He was obviously against the idea of accepting gay marriage and sustained that gay relationships are simply ‘unnatural’. Moreover, he stated that nearly 80% of Americans were opposing the legalization of marriage among gay people. Along with the author many people opposed to the idea at that time of his article – But in despite of that, gay marriage was finally legalized in the United States in June 26, 2015 (Wikipedia 2001).

In this article, “Kentucky Clerk Ordered to Jail for Refusing to Issue Gay Marriage License” the author James Higdon focuses on the recent topic of gay marriage. Higdon’s story relates to a Kentucky woman named Kim Davis. Davis was arrested September 3, 2015 because she refused to issue marriage license to a gay couple. “Under questioning from her attorney, Davis went on to express her opposition to same-sex marriage, which she said was ‘not of God’ and contrary to natural law and therefore not something that she could condone” (Higdon). This quote shows that Davis refused to issue marriage licenses because of her religious beliefs. Davis’s religious beliefs are so strong that she continued to fight with the law and the court judge

In an ever changing atmosphere where there are numerous definitions of family, why would it be important to have the right to have an official union? That civil right, to same sex couples, means that they are recognized equally to all other couples in this nation. In “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage”, Theodore Olson discusses California’s Proposition 8 and its ramifications on the value of marriage. Olson states, “Marriage is one of the basic building blocks of our neighborhoods and our nation”. Same sex couples want to share in this value that having the right to marry gives them. Legalizing same-sex marriage according to Olson would, “represent the culmination of our nation’s commitment to equal rights” (Olson, 76). Having all the aspects of a model family are just as important to all types of couples in today’s diverse

In “Texas clerks could refuse to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples.” (2015), Lauren Gambino states that Texas clerks can refuse to issue marriage license to same sex couples, they can justify their refusal on the grounds of religious liberty. Gambino supports her claim by providing factual evidence--including quotes from Texas clerks, which makes her more ethical, because she provides a neutral informative article on this matter. Gambino hopes to inform US citizens of what is going on in Texas, following the same sex marriage legalization by the Supreme Court, while enticing anger

Society is often built on lies which allows for the people within it to become accustomed to them. Rhetorical fallacies are now an integral part of persuasion in the world. They allow themselves to continue to affect the listener long after their delivery. In the event of these three speeches, the speakers used multiple fallacies to continually captivate the audience. While a valuable resource, if overused they may become the downfall of a message.

Presidential candidate Donald Trump, has used rhetorical fallacious tactics, to persuade his audience into voting for him. Fallacies may exploit emotional triggers in the listener, or take advantage of social relationships between people.

Religious and non-religious people are not quite different as people may think, as they both are on their own path of figuring out what life is all about and what is their purpose in life. Often, believers and non-believers of Christ are seen bumping heads in disagreement and some may take it to the extreme with their arguments, to the point where their arguments are not credible nor logical. Bill Maher, an American comedian, political commentator, and television host, even made his own comedy documentary called Religulous, examining and challenging religion and religious belief. He argues how religion is ridiculous, as it said in the title of the documentary, while traveling the world in search for religious people’s take on why they are religious.

Susie O’Brien’s article ‘It’s time to honour gay couples and allow them to marry’ (The Advertiser, November 20, 2010, p. 27) is an argument that surrounds the unfair inequality of gay couples and the issue of gay marriage. O’Brien uses argumentative devices such as appeals to pathos, logos, repetition, rhetorical questions, tone and considered words and concise sentences. These devices provide the audience with a clear direction that remains focused throughout the entire article.

Debates about gay marriage continue to simmer within American public discourse, though much of the more heated rhetoric has calmed since the earliest efforts to legalize same-sex marriage succeeded in numerous states. These debates have spanned many topics, ranging from religion to politics and beyond. Andrew Sullivan, a prominent gay and self-described conservative political commentator, addressed one angle of the issue in his July 19, 2011 Newsweek Magazine article “Why Gay Marriage is Good for America.” Through a mixture of personal reflection, social commentary, and political argumentation, Sullivan’s article is less a defense of gay marriage than it is a defense of the idea that gay marriage is compatible with conservative political values. Although Sullivan makes a good case for his position in the article, his argument is ultimately under-developed; the lengthy personal reflections serve to reinforce a relatively minor point in the context of the larger argument, shifting focus away from the more relevant portions of the argument.

I admired how you integrated examples, or experiences to support the definition of the outlined fallacies. Meanwhile, the perspectives for the outlined fallacies are very insightful. You brought out some interesting concepts regarding Attacking the person, and Red Herring. I believe your perspective concerning why people attack, and change a subject is accurate for some individuals. I also imagine that the bandwagon theory is common for children, however, this may be displayed by people age 50 and above, since they may want to avoid conflict, and or have lack of interest in a subject matter.

It wasn’t until October 12, 2007, that governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill approved by state law makers that would legalize gay marriage. On May 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the state constitution protects a fundamental “right to marry” that would also extend to same sex marriage. The people were outraged saying that same sex marriages went against their religion on their views of a traditional marriage. People also argued that gay marriage went against the constitution as well because people could no longer have free exercise of religion. According to the Huffington Post, gay marriage, “Protects the free expression of religion, as supporters of Proposition 8 were worried that Gay Rights advocates were not affording them the same courtesy-to live and believe as they please-as the Gay and Lesbian community was/is demanding.” All these events eventually lead to picketing against gay marriage and the voice of the American people was starting to be heard on this

All of the media address the subject of logical fallacies- they define them, give examples of their most common forms, and offer tips to avoid them as well as to identify them in our writing. A good argument is one that contains good premises that effectively back up a conclusion. All points must be presented in a logical way and must apply to reason. However, often arguments can contain fallacies and be weak. Logical fallacies are flaws that diminish the validity and relevance of an argument. They constitute “weak reasoning”. Some of the most common forms of logical fallacies are: making unfounded generalizations or basing an argument on stereotypes, assuming that correlation is the same thing as causation, presenting a premise in an argument

One of the most controversial issues around today is gay marriages. Many believe that the media is primly responsible for the idea of same-sex marriages, but when it all comes down to it there are really only two sides; those who support gay marriages, and those who oppose them. Two authors write their opinions on their opposite views on this issue. Sullivan (2002) supports same-sex marriages and believes marriage to be a universal right, not just restricted to heterosexuals. Contrary to Sullivan, Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is a sacred traditional family value that should be set aside for heterosexual couples. (2002)Throughout this essay, I will summarize both authors’ ideas and evaluate them through their evidence and