In the short story that I had just read was biased. I thought of this because he was a Christian and served as a U.S. Marine Corp. He knew his facts mostly about the amendment and rights but he kind of went all over the place with them. He also didn’t state that as one of the amendments is the freedom to be who we want to be in the United States which he is kind of making himself look like a hypocrite for using amendments but not bringing up the main one. He says he is a supporter of the amendment so then why does he care if people are getting married with the same sex. It’s their freedom and right. I personally don’t have a problem with same sex marriage. It isn’t harming or affecting me or any one else for that matter. He is missing omission when he starts to talk about the amendment. Most of his information is non-relevant in this case. When he brings up percentages of adolescents it really doesn’t make sense. They assume people are the way they are because of their past. He is trying to say people who have experienced awful pasts with not living with a mom or father will turn out to be gay which isn’t the case at all. He is taking for granted about people past relationships with family members. Some of the context maybe accurate but I feel like most isn’t. What appealed to me about the authority is that he kept brining up Christianity, his religion, and he came from an elite school, Brown University. Even though he sounded very smart and seemed like he knew what he was talking about, when I broke down each step he had many mistakes made.
No comments:
Post a Comment