Opinion critique #1: March for Life shows pro-life cause is strong - Abortion is murder, not health care

-

In a FoxNews article, Allie Beth Stuckey writes about perhaps one of the most socially controversial issues: abortion. Stuckey is an American podcast host, blogger, author and conservative Christian commentator who works for Blaze TV.

Stuckey’s theme and angle are clear. As the title of the article states, “Abortion is child murder, not health care.” Additionally, a main part of the article spoke about the 46th March for Life and how President Donald Trump was the first president in history to attend the event.

Allie Beth Stuckey is an American podcast host, blogger, author and conservative Christian commentator who works for Blaze TV. She has also appeared on Fox & Friends

 Additionally, Stuckey’s stance on abortion remains clear, as she uses credible human sources from both political spectrums. One particular quote she uses is from Trump: “We are here…to defend every child, born and unborn, to fulfill their God-given potential.”

Stuckey used the tweet of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts: “Abortion rights are human rights. Abortion rights are economic rights. We will never stop fighting to defend those rights.”

Stuckey didn’t forget to mention Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont’s tweet: “Abortion is health care.”

However, I do wish Stuckey pulled statistics on how many women receive an abortion per year, the average age of those who receive an abortion, the reasons why one receives an abortion, the psychological repercussions of having an abortion and other valuable evidence that could make her argument stronger. I contend that if Stuckey provided more statistical evidence, her argument could be more persuasive.

Stuckey lead was as follows: “The thousands of people who gathered in Washington Friday for the 46th March for Life proved that enthusiasm for the pro-life cause is as strong as it’s ever been.”

In my opinion, I think Stuckey had a strong lead based on the color, vocabulary, persuasiveness and storytelling elements she used. Stuckey didn’t say something simple like “People attended the 46th Match for Life in Washington Friday.” Instead, she used colorful words like “thousands of people” in order to provide vivid imagery. When she mentions, “Enthusiasm for the pro-life cause is as strong as it’s ever been,” it also adds to the color of the piece. Overall, the lead follows a hard news lead primarily because it gets to the point to deliver the news. It also incorporates the five W’s and H—which for those who don’t know is the who, what, where, when, why and how.

As for the kicker, Stuckey ends the piece by simply stating “This is why we march.” I personally believe this a simple, yet effective way to end the piece. Instead of trying to summarize her main points in a jumble of words, she uses five words that leave a lasting impact on readers. In this example, a full circle kicker would be applicable.

Perhaps I am biased, but I am particularly passionate about the pro-life stance on abortion and I am familiar with Stuckey’s work. While other people may disagree with me, Stuckey does an excellent job at grabbing my attention from the lead and ends in the strongest and most satisfying way possible (for me).

Further, Stuckey’s piece consisted of clear transitions. I wouldn’t go as far as calling the transitions “colorful,” but maybe that is because abortion is such a hard and controversial matter. Stuckey also uses repetition and continually illustrates how she contends that abortion is murder.

Stuckey uses her experience as a mother in this piece as a way to tell it from her perspective and to make a more credible argument. For instance, she mentions, “Becoming a mom last year made the abortion issue tangible for me. When we saw our kicking, punching, perfectly formed 11-week baby on the ultrasound, all the pro-life arguments I knew and believed became more than just talking points. They became experiences.”

Stuckey’s final statements in her piece also evoke an emotional and powerful perspective. She states, “This is why we fight so hard. This is why we work tirelessly to offer resources to pregnant women in crisis. This is why we do everything we can to create a culture of life, in which babies are viewed as blessings – not burdens. This is why we care. This is why we speak up.”

Overall, Stuckey has a clear, logical and well-thought-out argument. My main issue with her piece is that she could have used more statistical evidence to support her pro-life stance.

To read the article yourself, click here: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/allie-beth-stuckey-march-for-life-shows-pro-life-cause-is-strong-unborn-children-are-people

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Opinion piece #4: A controversial opinion: I'm conservative

-
How could a young, biracial woman be a Conservative? How could she be a Conservative if the color of her skin does not match the "correct" political party? She must be “against” her gender and race if she is a Conservative. She must be corrupted by rich, white men. I am a 20-year-old college student, I am a woman and I am biracial. I am also majoring in journalism with a double minor in business administration and Italian studies with aspirations to attend law school. I also speak Italian, but more importantly, I am a Conservative.  To the liberal mainstream, those who match this description are akin to a mythical unicorn. We are strange and surprising; however, individuals like myself are being celebrated in some newspapers and magazines for redefining social and cultural expectations. I truly love it when people are dumbfounded and confused that people like me exist. I was raised by an ultra-Conservative and Catholic family. Almost every night during my adolesc...
Read more

Opinion piece #3: Let's talk about socialism

-
Ah yes, socialism. Imagine: free college, free healthcare, or even basic universal income. Doesn’t that sound absolutely amazing in a completely sarcastic and hypothetical scenario? Quite frankly, no. Nothing is free, nor is such a thing attainable, unless we want increasingly higher taxes and want to dismantle the United States Constitution that our Founding Fathers vigorously worked on for our nation.  Socialism only works until you run out of other individual’s money. And that is a fact. By definition, socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. In other words, the government acts like an omnipresent guiding force that alleviates all of your social ills. Where is the incentive to work hard? Where’s the American Dream?  Socialism emerged as a response to the capitalist system. Whereas capitalism is based on a free...
Read more

How much personal information do you actually have on the internet?

-
Image
After all the scandals and controversy surrounding Facebook, one would think that people would take into consideration how much information the general public could access. With a quick google search, anyone could access your public information--or even information that one is not aware of. Information can include, but is not limited to: your first/last name, email, phone number, photos, etc. This poses the question: how much information should we allow for general consumption? Above is a google search of myself. Upon searching myself on Google, I immediately could access nearly all of my social media accounts. My Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and multiple photographs from my adolescence. My likes and dislikes on Facebook, where I went to high school, or even where I currently attend college are all things others can read about me. I am guilty of being nearly every social media platform; and to name a few: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Tumblr, Pinterest, VSCO, Redd...
Read more