When you think about SB 1062 or "Religious Freedom Bill" you think about what the you've heard through the media. Whether it be the news, internet, or social media most of it describes the bill as legal discrimination against gays. Hearing that you think, "I can't support discriminating against gays." What if everything you've heard about this piece of legislature isn't what it's made out to be? That's exactly what R.R. Reno argued in his article "Rewriting Nature's Laws." He says "That's not how the media reported it, however. Quite the opposite, in fact. It was treated as B-I-G-O-T-R-Y, a ruthless, heartless, large-scale attack on gay rights." In this article he wrote for First Things, Reno tries to persuade and inform the audience using ethos and logos that what they are hearing and seeing about the bill is very much a push from the gay rights movement and it is troubling that they can turn a simple bill into a huge controversy, and his literary work accomplishes that nicely.
Reno starts by using reason to inform the audience of what the bill really does and why it does it. "It's important to recognize the limited purpose of SB 1062. It did not seek to use religious freedom to rule out the expansion of gay rights in Arizona. Same-sex marriage is presently not permitted there. Nothing in the bill would prevent changing that, nor would it impede other gay rights legislation. On the contrary, SB 1062 was crafted under the assumption that gay rights will be expanded and same-sex marriage legalized." Putting a statement like this in the beginning allows the reader to really gain somewhat of an understanding from the side of the authors of the bill. It also allows the audience to trust that Reno knows the bill and has done research into it in order to form this opinion. Of course there are groups that would argue that fact, such as americablog.com's David Delmer who states, "The law's language can be easily read to protect the right of private entities (including business corporations) to use RFRA in defense of their free exercise rights, even when "free exercise" means "discriminating against others." Reno also defended SB 1062 with reason by showing that there are business owners in other states that are currently being sued for not servicing a gay couple because of personal religious beliefs and this potential law would protect those business owners.
Most of what Reno used in his argument was ethos. He feels so passionately about how deceived he felt the public was and that came out clearly in his writing. He went off on a tangent though by doing this, going into how the gay rights movement was trying to not get just toleration but they are using the "hostile environment" doctrine and that "will allow gay rights activists to use state power to police what people say and even think." He's not alone either, according to an entry on redstate.com someone says "Many in the LGBT community tried to draw a parallel to the Jim Crow laws used to force segregation of blacks from the 1880s to the 1960s. This was perhaps the biggest lie told about the legislation, as is the lie that homosexual issues are a matter of civil rights-a point of view not held by a majority of black pastors." As you can see this issue can get heated on both sides which makes writing about it so passionate. I don't think you could write an argument on a subject like this without using ethos.
I didn't find anything in the piece that used pathos to appeal to the reader, but I don't think there needed to be. Using ethos and logos, Reno was able to get his point across in a very direct and well thought out way. I don't support SB 1062 and I thought Gov. Brewer did the right thing when she vetoed the bill, however I did find it interesting to hear a well stated argument from the other side advocating for the bill.
Works Cited
Reno R.R. "The Public Square." First Things:A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life 243 (2014): 3-7 Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Oct. 2014.
"Jan Brewer Sells Religious Freedom to the Highest Bidder." Red State. 28 Feb. 2014. Web. 1 Oct. 2014.
Delmar, David. "No, Arizona’s SB 1062 Was Not “Egregiously Misrepresented” by Critics." America Blog. 1 Mar. 2014. Web. 1 Oct. 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment