Short questions essay

1. Now it’s your turn. Formulate a 3 to 5 line argument (much as the inductive and deductive formats given in your lecture) giving your own premises and conclusions agreeing or disagreeing with each of the following controversial statements/topics: Example: “Gay men or gay women should never be allowed to marry. This would lead to the loss of family values and the eventual destruction of the family unit not to mention the mockery of the union between a man and a woman traditionally blessed by both God and the state.” Your argument (either agreeing or disagreeing with the above – in this example I’ll disagree): “The U.S. bestows favors upon married heterosexual couples in various instances (income tax relief; adopting children; community property advantages; inheritances etc.). All U.S. citizens are guaranteed equal treatment under the law. Gay couples that are U.S. citizens must be treated as equals; THEREFORE they should be allowed to enter into a marriage contract recognized by the state, enjoying the same privileges as heterosexual couples.” NOTICE THE USE OF THE WORD ‘THEREFORE’; THIS IS THE BEST METHOD FOR CONCLUDING YOUR 3-LINE ARGUMENT. Now you try it: 1.The most important thing to learn is not how to play the game, but how to win the game. Winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing. 2.Atheism should not be tolerated in our society. This belief (or lack of) erodes the basic principles upon which the American democracy was built. 3.Gay men or gay women should never be allowed to raise children. 4.Women under the age of 18 must have parental consent before obtaining an abortion. 5.There is never an acceptable reason which condones a person purposefully ending his/her own life. 6. Read the brief description of the Edward Snowden dilemma on pg.46. Briefly outline 2 inductive arguments: a.Four to six sentence paragraph which defends Edward Snowden’s actions b.Four to six sentence paragraph which calls for the punishment of Edward Snowden by the US government for acts of treason ( possibly punishable by death). 2. Read the following opinion carefully:  It’s astounding that the same liberal establishment that is forever chanting odes to multiculturalism, diversity, tolerance, and inclusion is fanatical about banning any hint of religion from the public schools. Any hint of traditional Jewish or Christian religion, that is. (Buddhism, Wicca, and Santeria would probably pass muster.) Liberals believe it is acceptable for students to dress in the costumes, sample the food, and even perform the various rituals of distant cultures but unacceptable for them to practice their own beliefs. Similarly, that it’s fine for students to master the art of putting a condom on a cucumber and to memorize every last position specified in the Kama Sutra but not to learn the biblical perspective on sexuality. There’s a word for such folderol: insanity. One argument against the mention of religion in schools is that it is a divisive subject. That’s phony. There are dramatic differences of viewpoint in sociology, psychology, economics, history, and many other subjects, but we don’t call those subjects divisive and we don’t ban them from the schoolhouse. Besides, as attorney Jay Sekulow points out, federal courts begin the day with the words “God save the United States and this Honorable Court,” The Ten Commandments are displayed in US Supreme court, and the world hasn’t ended as a result.  Another argument is that every religion has its own scriptures and no one should be given preference over the others. OK, so don’t single out any one-let all be represented.  Post the Ten Commandments alongside the Code of Hammurabi and whatever others there are. Display the Hebrew Scriptures, the New Testament, and the Koran. Problem solved.  To ask students to leave their religious beliefs at the schoolhouse door is like asking them to leave their minds and hearts there. That is a violation of common sense and their constitutional rights. Answer the following concerning “Welcome…Schools” (40 points)  i. In the second paragraph, Hoffman uses non-literal language (Mod 5) in order to arrive at a conclusion. Use one or two sentences to describe how the author uses inductive reasoning and non-literal language to make his point. Include what you feel is his conclusion in that paragraph.  ii.What type of inductive argument does Hoffman use in his second paragraph? Explain in detail.  iii.Point out specific problems (at least 2) with Hoffman’s argument in paragraph 3.  iv.Explain the analogy (inductive reasoning) in the last paragraph (identify it). Do you agree with the analogy (inductive reasoning) in the last paragraph? What might be a potential problem of this analogy? Explain your answer and determine if the last sentence follows logically from that analogy.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Short questions essay
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay
Place Order
Grab A 14% Discount on This Paper
Pages (550 words)
Approximate price: -
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)