Rough Draft 4.1

“Here, hold on to this for me.”  one of the guys said while passing a gun to the kid next to him. My eyes widened as I instinctively grabbed my boyfriend Jon’s hand. It was at that moment when I knew I was in trouble. Could this really be happening to me? I remember thinking to myself.  Did he really just threaten us with a gun? I looked around trying to put distinct faces to figures in front of me and failing miserably. It must have been somewhere around 2am at that point and the only light I had to work with was coming from a street lamp at least 50 feet away.

“Come with us.” he spoke again, this time to Jon, and began leading the way to the back of the park with the five other guys closely behind.

There were six of them and two of us; we were easily out numbered without anything to defend ourselves with. I dared not to let Jon’s hand go and walked with him towards the unfinished skate park in one of the back corners. My heart was pounding immensely once we stopped at the destined location. One of the guys began having meaningless small talk with us as the rest stood around in silence. Responding very calmly to anything he had asked us, I was hoping they’d have a change of heart at let us go safely.

That’s when it happened. The guy talking to us stopped in mid sentence and threw a right hook at Jon’s jaw. He continued to punch Jon while three of the other guys joined in. We. Are. Dead. I remember thinking at that very moment. My boyfriend was the most important person to me during that time and to see him getting hurt right in front of my eyes was one of the scariest things I’ve ever witnessed. That was probably the only reason why I was too distracted to notice the remaining two guys approaching me. “Follow me.” one of them said and took me to another side of the park.

The events from that moment on are a blur. Basically, I was taken aside to be raped at the same time my boyfriend was being jumped. They had no mercy and even threatened to get me pregnant but I remained calm. I hoped that the less fuss I made, the quicker this all would be done with. It wasn’t too long before the guys felt “accomplished” with what they had done to us and they all walked out of the park leaving us with these final words, “You better not tell anyone”. Once they were out of sight, I slowly walked up to Jon who was pretending to be unconscious on the ground. His face was a mess, bruise marks and cuts purtruding  from various angles on his once flawless face.  I helped him up from the ground and we walked back to my house. What a nightmare that night turned out to be, all because I wasn’t allowed to see Jon during the daytime. After everything, there was only one thing I knew for sure that night, there was no way in hell I was going to tell my mother.

Reflection 3.2

Overall, I'm more confident in this paper than any of my previously written ones. The revisions I've made to my rough draft mostly dealt with trying to make my argument seem more focused. I changed my topic from homosexuals being able to adopt children to being in support of homosexuality in general and being the should receive the same civil rights. I feel that, although this new change is a lot more broad, I was able to cover most of my points without it seeming like I was going off topic.

Final Draft: Essay 3.2: Grandpa, He Was Born This Way: A Rogerian Argument In Support Of Homosexual Equality

Dear Grandpa,
         I’ve decided to write you this letter because I honestly haven’t been able to get you out of my head for the past few weeks. The last conversation we had on the phone didn’t end too well (since we both ended up arguing and avoiding talking to each other for the next few weeks), but I think it is time to bring up the topic once again. Now, I understand that you might possibly never agree with me, but I want to try to help you understand why I have no issue with homosexuality. If you are willing to hear me out and to keep an open mind as I try to explain to you why I will always stand by my beliefs, I’m sure I can explain to you how the world can benefit from homosexual couples. In turn, I promise to respectfully listen to any part of my letter you choose to respond to.
        First, I wanted to let you know that I do recognize where you are coming from. I understand that you were raised as a Roman Catholic, as was I, and the Catholic Church is strongly opposed to homosexuality. For this reason, I wouldn’t want you to sacrifice your beliefs or religion in anyway. However, I do want to let you know my point of view. The last time we talked, you pointed out a few verses from the Bible that support the idea that God is against same sex practices. Just to refresh your memory a bit, below I’ve include two examples of verses that have stuck with me since then:

"You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination." - Leviticus 18:6
"A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed." - Leviticus 20:13

Many people who come across these verses in the Bible, particularly those that are more religious, will automatically become troubled by these words. You, along with millions of other people, would never want to be thought of as an “abomination” to anyone, especially not in the eyes of the ones you love most. You constantly reminded me in our last conversation that God didn’t make a man and a woman for no reason. You claim that being with another man is not “natural“ (since same sexes cannot reproduce) and therefore, shouldn’t be done. While this are both legitimate reasons you’ve repeatedly told me, I still stand by my belief that homosexuality is not always a choice, therefore I certainly do not believe homosexuals should be denied the rights given to any heterosexual couple.

        Homosexuality has been around since before Christ, not just the last few centuries it has been exploited by society. I recently came across an article entitled “What the Bible Says- And Doesn’t Say- About Homosexuality” that I found to be quite intriguing. It was written by a homosexual Reverend named Mel White, who researched throughout that Bible for particular sections that allude to homosexual practices. Her intensive research has shown that no where in the bible does Jesus mention anything related to same-sex behavior nor does the term “homosexuality” used thousands of years ago translate into the current day meaning. Reading White’s article had left me wondering whether people have just blown the 6 or so verses that mention anything homosexually related out of proportion because of the possible misinterpretations of them.

On another note, I have also been doing some research in biological anthropology and came across something applicable to homosexuality. From an evolutionary standpoint; if you accept the premise that everything we do from a reproductive standpoint is to better our gene pool, ie. everything affects our “fitness” and homosexuality has been proven have been around for 2000 years, why hasn’t this “poor gene” or “abomination” been weeded out? To put in simpler terms, it does not affect our ability to survive in any negative way. If it did, we would not be able to survive as a species and therefore, that undesirable trait would have died off. However, since homosexuality clearly has not died off yet, the trait cannot be awful from an evolutionary standpoint (Larsen, par. 96).

Correspondingly, two men who want to be together do not lack the capability of being just as affectionate and loving with each other as they would be with someone of the opposite sex. Homosexuality also does not hinder ones ability of being responsible and capable of raising a family as well. Statistics have shown that children raised by same sex couples are just as intelligent as a child who was raised by a heterosexual couple. In fact, I read in another article entitled “Children Of Same-Sex Couples Do Fine”, written by Sean Alfonso for the CBS News, that children who were raised in a single parent household are more likely to have more issues with self-esteem and discipline than those with gay parents (Alfano, par .7). I believe that anyone who wants to raise a child and proves that they are able of doing so should be given the opportunity.

In the Presidential Campaign Questionnaire of 2008, Obama was asked his opinion on gay couples adopting children. His response was “I believe there are too many children who need loving parents to deny one group of people adoption rights. A child will benefit from a healthy, loving home, whether the parents are gay or not" (Giordano, par. 23). Even if you do not agree that homosexuality is morally right, you can’t turn away from the number of children without parents and in need of homes. A couple that has a steady income and has shown to be emotionally responsible should be given the same chances, regardless of their sexual preferences.

        Furthermore, as you might have noticed, one of the biggest concerns facing our world today is over population. Why would we try to ban something that not only diminishes population (since two people of the same gender cannot reproduce) but also increases quality of living for those people who are already on this planet? Regardless of what you think about homosexuality, you must agree that taking kids out of foster homes and other unsavory conditions improves quality of life for them. As a religious person, I know that you are supposed to be in support of generous and loving acts. Raising a child that is not biologically your own can definitely be considered an act of kindness.
        Essentially, we both can agree that we should choose the good of an individual over an ideal. We can have our own ideals and hold true to them in ourselves, but to deny homosexuals the same civil rights heterosexuals would be Un-American. Was not the Constitution on the United States based upon protecting one’s “right to disagree”? And if being homosexual makes one happy, is that not protected by the 5th Amendment, to pursuit their happiness? How others chose to live their lives is just not something others have a right to impede on.

To me, homosexuality should not be considered an abomination; it’s a part of life. I’ve grown up with many people in my life who have influenced me a great deal but just happen to like people of the same sex. Should I abandon those with some of the kindest hearts I’ve encountered just because of their sexual preference? In Leviticus 19:18, did God not say to “love thy brother as thyself” and to not “avenge or hold grudge to the children of thy people”? Even if you do not agree with homosexual behavior, you should not treat gays any differently then you would of someone who was “straight”. Everyone deserves to be treated with love and respect.

        So, perhaps we can come to the compromise that, at the bare minimum, good effects of homosexuals coupling can outweigh the pitfalls. We, as a society, must learn to be accepting and loving  towards one another rather than judge each other for what we are as individuals. You can still respect your religion by not loving a man yourself and you can let other people be happy in their own lives and help the living conditions of children in need. I really hope to hear from you soon and cannot wait to see you again.

                Love always,
                                            Jess

Works Cited

Alfano, Sean. "Kids Of Same-Sex Parents Do Fine - CBS News." Breaking News Headlines: Business, Entertainment & World News - CBS News. 12 Oct. 2005. Web. Mar. 2011.
Cathy, Smith A. "The History of Gays in the Military – The Sacred Band of Thebes." Suite101.com: Online Magazine and Writers' Network. 19 Dec. 2010. Web. Mar. 2011.

Prewriting Essay 4

Questions
1. What issue do you want to bring to greater attention?
2. What issue do you want to change?
3. I f you could grant one wish for someone you know, what would it be?
4. What did you do this weekend?

I'm not exactly sure what I would like to write about but a topic that comes to mind is raping against women. I haven't decided how personal I would like this essay to be but lately I've been noticing that society tends to blame the woman for being raped (rather than the person doing the action) and I think there is something wrong with this logic. Society nowadays doesn't seem to have sympathy for those who dress "inappropriately" or were at the "wrong place at the wrong time". Most parents put fear into their daughters' minds by telling them to never walk alone or wear clothing that show too much skin. Why should WE, as women, have to try to avoid such a terrible act from happening to us when we're the innocent ones? Instead, society should be teaching us NOT to rape.

Reflection 3.1

This argument is probably the easiest one for me to work with since I subconsciously use it all of the time. I'm the type of person that always likes to look at all sides of an issue and make sure I understand those point of views before I choose a side of my own. I never like to offend anybody and make sure that they are aware that I respect their opinions. I'm not very good at trying to persuade people to change their opinions on something so I'd much rather compromise with them.

Rough Draft 3.1: Grandpa, He Was Born This Way: A Rogerian Argument Pro Gay Adoption

Dear Grandpa,

I’ve decided to write you this letter because I honestly haven’t been able to get you out of my head for the past few weeks. The last conversation we had on the phone didn’t end too well, (since we both ended up arguing and avoiding talking to each other for the next few weeks) but I think it is time to bring up the topic once again. Now, I understand that you might possibly never agree with me, but I want to try to help you understand why I believe in gay rights and their right to adopt children. I hope you are willing to hear me out and to keep an open mind as I try to explain to you why I will always stand by my beliefs. In turn, I promise to do the same for you. 

First, I wanted to let you know that I do recognize where you are coming from. I realize that you were raised as a Roman Catholic,  and the catholic church is strongly opposed to homosexuality. For this reason, I wouldn’t want you to sacrifice your beliefs or religion in anyway. However, I wanted to let you know my point of view. The last time we talked, you pointed out a few verses from the bible that support the idea that God is against same sex practices. Just to refresh your memory a bit, below I’ve include two examples of verses that have stuck with me since then:
"You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female. It is an abomination." - Leviticus 18:6
"A man who sleeps with another man is an abomination and should be executed." - Leviticus 20:13
Anyone who comes across these verses in the Bible, particularly those that are more religious, will automatically become troubled by these words. Nobody wants to be thought of as an “abomination” to anyone, especially not in the eyes of the ones you love most. “God didn’t make a man and a woman for no reason. Being with another man is not natural and therefore, shouldn’t be done.” While those are both legitimate reasons you’ve repeatedly told me during our last conversation, I do not believe that homosexuality is a choice, therefore I certainly do not believe they should be denied the rights given to any heterosexual couple. (White, 58)

To me, homosexuality should not be considered an abomination; it’s a part of life. Homosexuality has been around since before Christ, not just the last few centuries it has been exploited by society. In fact, homosexuality was actually encouraged in both the Roman and Greek armies during ancient times. The thought was that men would fight more bravely to defend their country if they loved the people they were fighting with and would want to protect them. (Smith, 7)

In agreement, two men who want to be together do not lack the capability of being just as affectionate and loving with each other as they would be with someone of the opposite sex. It also does not hinder their ability of being responsible and capable of raising a family as well. Statistics have shown that children raised by same sex couples are just as intelligent as a children who were raised by a heterosexual couple. In fact, children who were raised in a single parent household are more likely to have more issues with self-esteem and discipline than those with gay parents. (Alfano, 7) I believe that anyone who wants to raise a child and proves that they are able of doing so should be given the opportunity.

In the Presidential Campaign Questionnaire of 2008, Obama was asked his opinion on gay couples adopting children. His response was “I believe there are too many children who need loving parents to deny one group of people adoption rights. A child will benefit from a healthy, loving home, whether the parents are gay or not." (Giordano, 23) Even if you do not agree that homosexuality is morally right, you can’t turn away from the amount of children without parents and in need of homes. A couple that has a steady income and has shown to be emotionally responsible should be given the same chances, regardless of their sexual preferences.

I have also been doing some research in biological anthropology and came across something applicable to homosexuality. From an evolutionary standpoint; if you accept the premise that everything we do from a reproductive standpoint is to better our gene pool, ie. everything affects our “fitness” and homosexuality has been proven have been around for 2000 years, why hasn’t this “poor gene” or “abomination” been weeded out? To put in simpler terms, it does not affect our ability to survive in any negative way. If it did, we would not be able to survive as a species and therefore, that undesirable trait would have died off. However, since it clearly has not died off yet, the trait cannot be awful from an evolutionary standpoint. (Larsen, 96)

Correspondingly, one of the biggest concerns facing our world today is over population. Why would we try to ban something that not only diminishes population (since two people of the same gender cannot reproduce) but also increases quality of living for those people who are already on this planet? Regardless of what you think about homosexuality, you must agree that taking kids out of foster homes and other unsavory conditions improves quality of life for them. As a religious person, you are supposed to be in support of generous and loving acts. Raising a child that is not biologically your own can definitely be considered an act of kindness.

Essentially, we both can agree that we should choose the good of an individual over an ideal. We can have our own ideals and hold true to them in ourselves, but what other people do to pursuit their happiness, which is protected by the 5th Amendment, is not something that we should impede on.

So, perhaps we can come to the compromise that, at the bare minimum, good effects of same sex marriage can outweigh the pitfalls. Parents who cannot have kids of their own get to raise children that are in desperate of said home. You can still respect your religion by not loving a man yourself and you can let other people be happy in their own lives and help the living conditions of children in need.

Can’t wait to see you again,

Jess

Works Cited

Alfano, Sean. "Kids Of Same-Sex Parents Do Fine - CBS News." Breaking News Headlines: Business, Entertainment & World News - CBS News. 12 Oct. 2005. Web. Mar. 2011.

Cathy, Smith A. "The History of Gays in the Military – The Sacred Band of Thebes." Suite101.com: Online Magazine and Writers' Network. 19 Dec. 2010. Web. Mar. 2011.

Giordano, Scott A. "Barack Responds to Human Rights Campaign Questionnaire." Organizing For America. 14 June 2007. Web. Mar. 2011.

Larsen, Clark Spencer. Our Origins: Discovering Physical Anthropology. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2008. Print.

White, Rev. Mel. "What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality." Soulforce. 2011. Web. Mar. 2011.

Reflection 2.2

I'm not sure how I feel about this paper. I mean, I know my final draft is much better than the rough draft I've been struggling to write for weeks now, I still believe I could have done better. I think what I have trouble most with is that I have so many ideas about what I want to do with my paper and I don't know how to make it all flow. I find plenty of useful sources that I know will benefit my paper but again, I have a hard time with trying to make it all connect. Hopefully, my paper doesn't appear to be too sporadic, like I think it does.

Final Draft: Essay 2.2 Rebuttal Against Amy Chua's "Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior

Dear Amy Chua,
         After reading your article, “Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior”, written for the January 8th issue of the Wall Street Journal, I must say that I’m quite offended at how you boldly state that “Chinese” mothering techniques are far more successful than the more nurturing “Western” mothering. I find your sweeping generalizations of American parenting offensive particularly because an American mother, whom I believe to have done a wonderful job of raising her children, raised me. Just because a child does not grow up to become a mechanical engineer or the president of a well-known company does not mean that they are “unsuccessful” and certainly should not entirely be blamed on the parents.
        It has come to my attention, over the past few years, that the Chinese style of child rearing often creates psychologically unstable, socially maladjusted, nervous wrecks. The constant insistence (from their “Chinese” mothers) of meeting impossibly high standards with the threat of a “screaming, hair-tearing explosion” (par. 12) for the return of anything less than flawless perfection, brings impressionable children up into a “pressure cooker” of hostility and fear. (Vongs, 1).
You are quick to judge the parents who are concerned with damaging their child’s self-esteem but fail to understand why they feel that it is necessary to do so. Society has led us to believe that the road to success leads to going to college, getting a good paying job, raising a family, etc. The pressure of trying to meet all of these set standards can be quite overwhelming for anyone, hence the reason why American parents feel that it is necessary for their children to sleep over their friend’s house every once in a while or join a new sport.
        Not only do these activities create an outlet from the constant stress being thrown at the kids, but they are surprisingly more beneficial to the child than you might think. Kids who actively participate in events such as sleepovers or team sports have an earlier chance at enhancing these social skills.
Growing up, I have always been a shy person growing up and sleepovers had always made me a bit uneasy. I can tell you though, that I was able to gain a new type of confidence and understanding in others after attending each one. Sleepovers can easily teach kids how to interact and co-operate with others. For example, there were many times were I didn’t even want to sleep over a friend’s house because I wasn’t getting along with that person or any other petty reason, but was not able to have my parents pick me up. Those kinds of sleepovers taught me the most, to be honest, because I was able to learn how to deal with being stuck with people I did not want to be around and remain patient until the next morning when my parents came to take me home.

Sports have a similar type of affect on kids, especially when it comes to working with others. As a student, I’ve always been told that one of the most important thing companies look for in a worker is someone who can work in a team and can easily interact with other people. I believe that people should begin to build their social skills as early as possible in order to ready themselves for the “real world” and joining a sport or a sleepover is an easy way to do so.

Additionally, there are many downsides to not having these types of extra-circular activities in one’s life. Not only will kids not have the advantage of knowing how to interact with others but they also will not have a way to let out all of the stress being built inside if them from the pressures that come with success. This can lead to countless amounts of problems that frequently has me questioning whether this type of “success” is really worth the consequences.

Currently studying at Ithaca College, sometimes referred to as the “sister school” of the Ivy League Cornell University, I am constantly able to compare the two schools and the pressures placed upon the students’ shoulders. Within the two years that I’ve been studying here, I’ve heard endless stories of the number of Cornell students that commit suicide. A recent study I came across stated that 13 of the 21 students that committed suicide between 1996-2006 were of Asian decent. The fact that Asian students only make up 14 percent of the students population has brought up concerns to people across the globe. (Ramanujan, 1) (Vongs, 5)

        Jane Chin, a Ph.D. and former student of Cornell University, was very quick to rebuke your teaching style. The daughter of two “Tiger” parents, she often doubts whether her success was really worth all of the “scars” she has been left with by her parents. I could not agree more with her as she listed the types of societies that would benefit from your teaching style. Just a few from her list that stood out are the following:
“[A society that] considers outward success based on a standard of “winning” and “better than” as the only form of success, considers parents’ “face” and “pride” and “ego” as synonymous with love for their own children, believes that human beings experience contentment, satisfaction, and fulfillment the exact same way.”
        To me, the Eastern teaching style may have “good intentions” but should not be forced upon anyone. What “Chinese” parents seem to have trouble most with is understanding that not everyone wants to be an engineer or business owner. So, when someone is being forced to do something they don't want to do, it is easy to get stressed and feel as if there is no way out.


Amy, I am not trying to change your mind in anyway but just trying to make you understand that there cannot be a superior parenting style because we all handle pressure differently.


Sincerely,
Jessica Burgos


Works Cited:


Jane, Chin. "Asian Students, Depression, and Suicide: Begin with the Parents!"Chinspirations.com — Jane Chin . Practical Idealist Seeker Action-hero-mom Entrepreneur. Web. 20 Mar. 2011.
Ramanujan, Krishna. "Asian Students." Cornell Chronicle Online. 19 Apr. 2006. Web. 20 Mar. 2011. 
Vongs, Pueng. "Inside the Asian Pressure Cooker." IMDiversity.com Career Center, Job Bank and Multicultural Villages - Where Careers, Opportunities and Diversity Connect. 23 Aug. 2005. Web. 20 Mar. 2011.

Rough Draft

Dear Amy Chua,


After reading your article, “Why Chinese Mother Are Superior”, written for the January 8th issue of the Wall Street Journal, I must say that I’m quite offended at how you boldly state that “Chinese” mothering techniques are far more successful than the more nurturing “Western” mothering. I find your sweeping generalizations of American parenting offensive particularly because I was raised by an American mother, whom I believe has done a wonderful job of raising her children. Just because a child does not grow up to become a Mechanical engineer or the president of a well-known company does not mean that they are “unsuccessful” and certainly should not entirely be blamed on the parents. The Chinese style of child rearing produces psychologically unstable, socially maladjusted, nervous wrecks, who from the constant insistence (from their “Chinese” mothers) of meeting impossibly high standards with the threat of a “screaming, hair-tearing explosion” (par. __)  with the return of anything less than flawless perfection, bring impressionable children up into a “pressure cooker” of hostility and fear. (Vongs, ___).
You are quick to judge the parents who are concerned with damaging their child’s self-esteem but fail to understand why they feel that it is necessary to do so. Every parent’s dream is to have their child become something great, but we all have different opinions of what “great” stands for. Society has led us to believe that being successful means going to college, getting a good paying job, raising a family, etc. The pressure of trying to meet  all of these set standards can be quite overwhelming for anyone. From personal experience, I can tell you that I have never been good at handling pressure and

it really _______ and is it worth all of the dedication when there are many consequences that come into play? Jane Chin,  a Chinese Ph.D. woman who had grown up with “Tiger” parents, was very quick to rebuke your teaching style because of all of the scars she claims to be left with.

Companies say that the second most important thing that they look for in a worker is someone who can work in a team and can easily interact with other people. I believe that person should begin to build their social skills as early as possible in order to ready themselves for the “real world”. Kids who actively participate in events such as sleepovers or team sports have an earlier chance at enhancing their social skills. I have always been told

What are sleepovers good for? They teach kids how to interact with other kids and teach them how to co-operate.

Brainstorming Essay 3.1

Gay & Lesbian Adoption

I came across the following quote this morning:

UPPORTS EQUALITY GOAL: SAME SEX PARENTING RIGHTS

Obama supports Same Sex Adoption 

Barack Obama Quotes on Same Sex Adoption: "I believe there are too many children who need loving parents to deny one group of people adoption rights. A child will benefit from a healthy, loving home, whether the parents are gay or not." [from the Human Rights Campaign's 2008 Presidential questionnaire]

I'm all for LGBT rights but I definitely see why people would be against gay homosexuals adopting children. In some ways, I agree with the cons because the mentality of the child is at "stake"but then again, the adoption process is so complicated that I feel like anyone who would be willing to go through it, should  be considered to do so. 

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/gay-lesbian-adoption-parenting-29790.html

Gay Adoption Debate and Poll: http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/gay_adoption.HTM

Ten Arguments From Social Science Against Same-Sex 'Marriage': http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=if04g01

Reflection 2.1

For some reason, I'm never completely confident in my rough drafts as I should be. The research process was/is a bit difficult for me because I'm still not exactly sure my reasons are as strong as they could be. I feel as though I need to bring up more reasons to support my claim that are more diverse than similar to each other. That way I will be able to disprove the author of the article from different directions rather than from the same angle. (Not sure if this makes sense entirely. Hope so!)

Documentation Quiz

1. We are using the MLA 2009 format to site our sources.

2. Works Cited citation

3. Author and/or editor names (if available), Article name in quotation marks (if applicable), Title of the Website, Any version numbers available, including revisions, posting dates, volumes, or issue numbers., Publisher information, including the publisher name and publishing date, Take note of any page numbers (if available), Date you accessed the material.

Reflection 1.2

I feel like I had a lot more to work to do with my final draft than I did with my rough draft due to the fact that I had to restructure it. I do feel a lot more confident in this draft than I did with my last one, mostly because I already knew what I wanted to say. I still feel like I was a bit redundant but not to the extent where I was having extreme writer's block. 

Essay 1.2: Is Happiness Really A Warm Gun?: A Rhetorical Analysis on "Government Should Create Stricter Gun Laws"

            The article that seemed to have the most appealing claim was “Government Should Create Stricter Gun Laws” written by Megan Weintraut for the Itahacan at Ithaca College. To get her point across, Weintraut uses plenty of logos, along with some ethos, to try to persuade her audience. Overall, I feel as though Weintraut went for tactics that were more on the safe side rather than risky, providing points that were difficult to argue with but left the audience clueless about what to do about the situation.

            Solely upon reading the headline of the article, it is obvious that Weintraut is not content with the current status of the United States’ gun/violence situation. That being said, it can be assumed that her intended audience is not only anyone in the Ithaca area but any American being that we are all affected by these laws.  In general, I believe that Weintraut did a good job at bringing evidence to the surface, causing her audience to begin questioning the situation, but not enough to make them want to do anything about it.

In the first paragraph, Weintraut does not hesitate to jump into her first reason: the laws are outdated and therefore, irrelevant to today’s society.  Her inclusion of the 2^nd Amendment, “A well regulated militia, being necessary of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed,” was a good tactic to gain her audience’s instant attention. People tend to forget the reasons why most of our laws today were first created and just accept them rather than question their existence. By including a small history lesson, Weintraut forces her audience to become conscious of the time period when it was created, instantly dating it, and causing them to doubt its relevancy.  (Par. 1)

She does, however, acknowledge the reasons why people would want to own a gun, most claiming self defense, but counters it by bringing up our “diverse and organized military services” and “law enforcement agencies”. Her argument is that we have people to do it for us so why bother but she lacks ideas of what to do about the people who currently own guns. We can’t just take the guns away from them so what should we do about it? I feel like if she were to give us examples of ways our guns laws should be improved, her argument would be more solid. (Par. 2)

As the reader gets further into the article, the use of logos becomes most noticeable. Weintraut hits her audience with statistics and more logical reasons why owning a gun is not as necessary as it used to be. By using statements such as, “…in 2006, firearms were involved in 68 percent of murders, and more than 90 percent of today’s gang-related homicides involve guns, Weintraut easily captures the attention of the American people. (Par. 3)

Towards the end of the article, she leans away from logos and focuses more on ethos. She tries to inject her audience with fear by saying that federal laws do not restrict the types and number of guns one can own after they turn 21. In her favor, it helps that she wrote this article soon after the recent Arizona shooting and includes that in her article. By mentioning this shooting along with Virginia Tech, and Columbine High School, Weintraut tries to get her audience to become aware of how easily situations such as these can happen again because of how broad our laws are. (Par. 5, Par. 6)

Throughout the article, Weintraut was pretty consistent in her argument. However, a line I had the most trouble with in her article that I felt invalidated the entire purpose of her claim was the following:

“Instead of minimizing the number of arms available to the public, the “sensible” argument would be to eliminate gun violence by providing more guns to the public.” (Par. 3)

I found no purpose in that statement at all. In fact, it continues to throw me off every time I reread it. As a whole, the article seems to be against the general body owning guns but this one line has me questioning its purpose. Does she really believe that anyone should be able to own a gun, even though she had just given the audience the statistics I provided earlier just one sentence earlier?  Was she being sarcastic? Maybe it’s just me not understanding it correctly but I feel like this one line holds so much importance because it counters everything she claims to be going for. The fact that she does not elaborate on this statement makes me suspect whether she even meant to have it in the article.

Taken as a whole, this “Government Should Create Stricter Gun Laws” was not as strong as it could have been. Weintraut made very valid points and provided good evidence to back up her opinions but her examples were not strong enough to motivate her audience to do act upon the issue. She also did not state what type of gun laws the government should consider creating. If Weintraut were to give alternative gun laws she believed would be more effective and was able to back them up, her argument would be taken a lot more seriously.

College Freewrite

I feel as though Travis Weinger's argument was a lot easier to agree with than Rick Perlstein. To be honest, I'm not the biggest fan of college to begin with but Weinger definitely reminds me of the reason why it really DOES matter. Especially with the economy today, even people how have a college degree (the most valued in society) aren't even able to get jobs. Imagine how hard it is for the people with a lower amount of education!

Reflection 1.1

I feel like I've gotten a lot out of our meeting on Wednesday and am a lot more confident in the paper now than I was before. Since Wednesday, I have created a new structure for my paper that I feel will make it flow a lot easier. Hopefully, this new outline will help me get out of the rut I've been in and eliminate the feeling of redundancy. 
Within the next week, I plan on taking your advice and visiting the writing center as well.

Essay 1.1: Is Happiness Really A Warm Gun?: A Rhetorical Analysis on "Government Should Create Stricter Laws"

            The article that seemed to have the most appealing argument was  “Government Should Create Stricter Gun Laws” written by Megan Weintraut for the Ithacan.To get her point across, Weintraut uses plenty of logos along with some ethos to try to persuade her audience. Over all, I feel as though Weintraut went for tactics that were …

            Weintraut begins her article by jumping into the idea that the gun laws are outdated. She explains that the second amendment which, in simple terms, states that everyone has the right to “bear arms” was written during a time period when guns was a necessity for protection and for providing for families. She then argues that the United States as come a long way from the 18^th century, now organizing services to the public that focus on providing protection for their citizens and mass food production.

I feel that this was a good tactic for Weintraut to use to immediately draw in her audience. People tend to forget the reasons why most of our laws today were first created and tend to just accept them rather than question their existence. By including a small history lesson of the guns laws, Weintraut forces her audience to open their eyes rather than tolerating the laws that are in existence.

As the audience reads further into the article, they are hit with statistics that compare the United States crime rate in comparison to the rest of the world. By using statements such as, “… in 2006 alone, firearms were involved in 68 percent of murders, and more than 90 percent of today’s gang-related homicides involve guns”, Weintraut easily captures the attention of her intended audience, the American people.What I found most interesting about Weintraut’s article, was when she links American media with the crime rate. Many people ignore or seem to forget that the United States is one of the only countries conservative enough to look down upon sexuality rather than violence. Weintraut  points out that violence is seen as humorous rather than traumatic in most of today’s media.

Prewriting Essay One

Government should create stricter gun laws. ---> her claim
Was she effective in getting her point across? She had many facts to support her argument don't some seemed to be a bit irrelevant. she was smart to write this article just weeks after the Arizona shooting because it was still fresh in people's minds, which might make them a bit more biased.

"Violence in the media constantly reinforces destructive behavior. The American Academy of Family Physicians reported that 66 percent of television programs contain violence. Instead of portraying realistic violence, these programs tend to associate violence with humor. For example, the popular video game Grand Theft Auto rewards players for murdering law enforcement. Through such an overdose of irresponsible violence in the media, today’s youth are becoming desensitized to the dangers of guns." 


American media seems to be more comfortable with violence than showing sexuality. Opposite in other countries. We have more violence?.... connection.


Uses Chris Rock's credibility to end her article....

Rhetorical Analysis Quiz

Explain the difference between textual and contexual analysis.


Textual analysis has to do with the text itself. Textual analysis only focuses on breaking down the argument itself.Contexual Analysis goes beyond that as is basically the "larger part of the conversation". It is everything that surrounds the text and will answer all of the 5 w's.