Blog on a Blog

                DyingWith Dignity Canada is a blog created by a Canadian organization of the same name. The goals of the blog are to inform, advocate, and support those who support physician assisted suicide initiatives and those who are suffering from terminal illnesses in Canada. Their motto “It’s Your Life. It’s Your Choice” is typical of many organizations created to advocate for physician assisted suicide. After searching the blog, it appears that there are posts from individuals who are in the position to potentially utilize an initiative for physician assisted suicide, from doctors and others in the healthcare profession who support these initiatives, and updates from around the world where there are Death with Dignity initiatives up for vote. There are also areas where someone looking at the site could go to receive information on the organization as well as on the issue of physician assisted suicide. They have a large section on the rights of someone who is terminally ill and support for those in need. The biggest part of the blog, however, is a section of personal stories. This section does an amazing job of putting a face to the issue of death with dignity in Canada by building the pathos.

The Reset... Free College

            Bernie Sanders wrote an op-ed for The Washington Post titled Make College Free For All. In his article, he described the reasons why the United States should follow the example set by other nations such as Finland and Germany and make public colleges tuition free.  Some of the reasons that Sanders gives in his argument reach back to the post World War II era where the economy was booming and jobs were plentiful. Sanders argues that the reason for the major economic growth of the US in this time was the availability of college to the millions of men who had served in the war through the GI Bill. Because of this initiative by the government, men who never would have been able to afford a college education were able to follow their ambitions and reach their full potential, bettering themselves and the nation as a whole.

            I cannot say that I necessarily agree with the proposition of free college, but given the opportunity, I believe that I would follow this route with my assignments had the Death With Dignity ideas hit a dead end. Sanders’ article is persuasive and thought provoking to the point that it has peeked a curiosity in me to learn more about free education and possibly even change my stance on the issue.

Claims on Euthanasia

            In the post Why Brittany Maynard Should Inspire Us to Oppose Euthanasia in All Cases for The Blaze, conservative blogger Matt Walsh argues against the legalization of physician assisted suicide.  To create an effective argument, Walsh utilizes all five types of claims, with proposal arguments being the most prevalent.  Walsh uses definitional claims to establish that physician assisted suicide is a death by prescribed medication, and it is the medication that ends the patient’s life, not the disease that allowed them to be prescribed the medication.  Walsh also uses definitional arguments to define what he believes a right is as well as a choice and the difference between the two.  He compares the names given to physician assisted suicide, aid in dying and dying with dignity, to other forms of death, murder and suicide, using a resemblance argument.  A causal argument is used to predict the potential consequences of legalizing Death with Dignity, such as changes in the law to allow competent children to opt for euthanasia subsequently leading to parents being allowed to opt for euthanasia without the child’s consent for both competent and incompetent children.  Walsh uses and ethical argument to describe the Hippocratic oath that physicians take and the ways he believes that physician assisted suicide violates that oath.  Throughout the entirety of the blog, Walsh uses a proposal argument to state that euthanasia should be completely opposed and prohibited world-wide.  Matt Walsh is able to create an effective argument by not only utilizing ethos, pathos, and logos, but by utilizing many types of claims as the building blocks for his case against physician assisted suicide.

The Importance of the Rhetorical Triangle

An argument is most effective when emotion is invoked, logic is utilized, and the author is credible.  Pathos, logos, and ethos make up the three points of Aristotle’s Rhetorical Triangle.  Effective argumentation is a careful balance of drawing a reader in by inducing an emotional response, presenting a logical argument, and building the writer’s credibility. 

According to Beth Hill, emotions will draw a reader in quicker than any other method an author can use.  Similar to shopping for a house, pathos is the exterior that makes the first impression.  A beautiful home exterior causes a buyer to go deeper and tour the inside, just as an emotional hook causes a reader to continue on and learn the argument.  The use of pathos creates a personal connection between the audience and the content. 

ASU shows that the use of logic provides substance to an argument and shows the truth of the writer’s words.  In a sense, logos is the foundation for the house that is a rhetorical argument.  Without a strong structure, a house will not continue to stand, just as an argument will not stand against scrutiny if it is not based in logic. 

European Rhetoric claims that ethos is the most important piece of the rhetorical argument.  The goal of ethos is to give the writer a trustworthy self-portrayal.  Ethos is the neighborhood.  A reader is more likely to consider an argument if it comes from a seemingly credible source.  People are more likely to buy a house in a nice neighborhood, somewhere that they can trust their home will not be vandalized or burglarized, than in a shady part of town. 

Without knowing it, people use the rhetorical triangle in everyday life.  Arguments in writing are similar to arguments in life:  they need emotional ties, logical foundations, and trustworthy sources.

Blog Post #1

The right to die, also known as "Dying with Dignity," is a very controversial topic.  Do we allow people to take their own lives and be free of severe pain?  Should we let God's will be what determines when a person will leave this world?  So long as enough signatures have been gained, this initiative will come to vote in Colorado this November.
As a Certified Nurse Aide, I care for many people who have been diagnosed with terminal illnesses. This initiative could change the way that my facility, and others, cares for those within their last six months of life.  Legalizing the prescription of life-ending medications could cause those at the end of their lives to be bullied into ending it all.  It could also allow people suffering from the unimaginable pain of cancer to end it before they become miserable enough to wish they were dead already.  I would imagine that facilities would still take people for end-of-life care, but what would happen to hospice care companies?
I do not know my stance on this issue, and I feel that writing an argumentative essay on this topic will help me to decide where I stand.  I can research and write about both sides of the issue, hopefully gaining enough insight to form my own educated opinion for voting this November.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/05/right-to-die-colorado-ballot/