It is finally
November: the issues have all been debated, the fingers pointed, and many early
votes cast. The United States is collectively holding its breath to discover
the nation’s next president. As a junior in high school, I cannot legally vote
to determine who holds the highest office in our country. But given the
opportunity, I would unhesitatingly vote for Mitt Romney to be our next
president. An important part of President Obama’s platform is protecting the
legality of abortion, whereas Mitt Romney’s opinions are exactly opposite. It
is this issue alone that will determine my vote, because I hold the sanctity of
human life above other issues. Getting our economy back on track is extremely
important and will affect millions of Americans. Bringing soldiers home and
negotiating with foreign countries is imperative to our success as a free
nation. Ending our dependence on oil and investing in discovery of new energy
resources is understandably important. But none of these topics could sway me
to vote for a man who believes in protecting a woman’s right to abort her
child.
President
Barack Obama believes that women have a right to choose. The right to choose what? Life or death for
their baby. Well, you might say, it’s not a baby. It’s a fetus, a clump of
cells. However, I believe that life begins at the moment of conception, when 23
chromosomes from each parent combine to form a totally unique genetic
combination. The child’s genes contain information that will guide growth and
development for the rest of her life, and it is also a completely separate code
from that of her mother. And if a baby is just part of a mother, and therefore
under her control, then, in the words of Peter Kreeft, every pregnant women has
four eyes and four feet. That sounds as about ridiculous as it is. Another
common argument is that the fetus cannot survive on its own, and is therefore
not human. However, the same principle could be applied to young toddlers,
aging seniors, or anyone that is in need of serious medical attention—are they
not human, then? It is amazing how many justifications for abortion, when
applied on a larger scale, simply do not make sense.
Many
pro-choice advocates, President Obama included, feel that abortion is a
solution to unplanned pregnancies, rape, and incest. I believe that the baby
should never have to pay for the crimes of the father. But even if the child
will be born into a single-parent, low-income family because the father is
absent or the pregnancy was unplanned, does that mean his life is worthless?
That his death is justified? Of course not. And the possibility of adoption is
often incredibly overlooked and underrated, when many couples are aching to
adopt.
But what if the
baby is deformed or unhealthy? The physical or mental capabilities of someone
should never determine their happiness or right to life. In fact, it would be
appalling if someone suggested killing all the children in the world with down
syndrome today, just because they are a personal burden or because they do not
look or act “normal.” But somehow, it seems more acceptable to abort an
“imperfect” baby in the womb, the safest place on earth. It is seen as kind,
merciful even, to end their short life before they really enter the world.
In a statement on
the case Roe v. Wade, President Obama
said, “ [the court decision] affirms a broader principle: the government should
not intrude on private family matters…” Is abortion really a private family
matter? I have talked to many people who tell me that, personally, they would
never consider having an abortion, but they believe in freedom of choice. Isn’t
that the same as saying, I would never own a slave myself, but I believe in
freedom of choice. I would never commit murder myself, but I believe in freedom
of choice. These statements seem absurd, but the point is, the rights to life,
liberty, and happiness claimed by a pro-choice mother often obliterate the same
rights held by her child. In a similar sense, the United States has laws
against murder, rape, and child abuse, which are both morally and legally
wrong.
There is no
country that can boast of such a free democracy as the United States of
America. It is my privilege, then, to voice my opinion and personal conviction
on issues that sway my vote for the presidency. More than reviving our struggling
economy, creating new jobs, or finding new energy resources, I am concerned
with the simple issue of abortion. I believe that abortion is morally wrong
because it kills an innocent child; therefore, it should be legally wrong,
which is the position held by presidential candidate Mitt Romney. In the midst
of a mainly Democratic state and school, then, I cast my ballot for Mitt
Romney.
By convincing your audience that Mitt Romney is the better candidate, you have successfully invoked pathos and logos. I find your argument very strong and precise. You presented your opinion, and supported it with logical reasons as to why you think abortion is wrong, which, believe me, you convinced me and I myself am pro-choice. However, because you only talked about one reason as to why you think Romney is a better candidate, I felt that it could have used one extra push to drive your argument all the way. If you presented more than one idea as to why you would vote for him, it would've made your argument that much more convincing. Nevertheless, I was moved and even satisfied by your words. Bravo, Karen Pimpo. Bravo indeed.
ReplyDeleteYou most definantly appealed to Pathos and Logos in your blog post. It was very moving, and I am an Obama supporter, so it is usually very hard to persuade me to even look at the other other side, so kudos to you!!! But looking back at your post however, it would also be helpful to bring up the economic plans that Govenor Romney wants to put in place for the future of America. Even though you and I have conflicting view points on the matter of who is more fitted to be president, you have correctly identified your argument and carried it out accordingly. Thank you for your blog post, so well written.
ReplyDeleteKaren, you effectively used logos and pathos to support your argument that Governor Romney should be the next president. The different comparisons you used, especially in the second to last paragraph really made me think. The use of facts about each candidate also strengthened your argument. This topic is oftentimes a make or break point for many voters, as it is for you. The only thing I would suggest is to add a few more reasons as to why you may want Romney as the president because he would have to deal with more than social issues. Overall, well written and convincing!
ReplyDelete