Opposing my argument

\

Picture

My opposing arguments take completely different views on my issue of how the government should be raising awareness about sex trafficking in America. My first opposing is a report of how the government in fighting the crime while my second one is expressing how our entertainment is making the public numb to the issue. 

Picture

The Goodwin G. HUMAN TRAFFICKING  article is about how the government is fighting human trafficking in America. There are a handful of departments that are in control of who gets grant, how much they are awarded, where their services are most needed, and how to properly educate and train the public to help. For example, there is fifteen grants that Department of Justice and Department of Health and Human Service oversee. The grants will be divided between organizations that help track data, keep communication open between law and service, victim services, public awareness and training. 

Picture

In "Finding Safe Harbor: Eliminating The Gap In Colorado's Human Trafficking Laws.", Jessica A. Pingleton argues how the new culture is one of the major causes in the growth of sex trafficking. Pingleton starts off using a major case that should have been a clean win lose due to how a law is worded. The idea is because in the beginning the law went after the victims in hopes of stopping the sex would stop the sex trafficking. Pingleton believes that the law should go after the johns instead of the victims. Pingleton then turns the report to how our culture has excepted words like whore and pimp into not only everyday words but also allows the sex trafficking victims and perpetrator. Even uses examples of Pretty Woman and Snoop Dog. 

2016 First Presidential Debate

The first of three debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump aired September 26, 2016. It was held in the Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. NBC’s very own Lestor Holt was honored to host the exhibit.  The discussion was divided by six segments, fifteen minutes each, lasting ninety minutes. It kicked off with a visual handshake of the candidate’s spouses. Holt then invited the crowd to applaud the candidates as they walked on the stage. 

The first question was concerning jobs for the American people. Clinton had the first turn, she began with thanking Holt for hosting. Then she lead into the issue with a pathos appeal by talking about her granddaughters second birthday. Quickly she turned to a more logos and maybe some pathos appeal when she finally got to the question at hand. Her plan is to raise minimum wage, fair and equal pay for females, debt-free college, and have the wealth pay their share. Trump replied majority of the time on pathos and ethos. His plan of action is to stop the major companies that are leaving, give the business a lower tax in hopes that they stay and build more business, and stop allowing China to use our country as a “piggy bank”. Trump enforced his plan with an extremely powerful appeal of the logos, stating the fact that we have tax to send product to other countries and we don’t tax for incoming product.  Therefore, we are losing money and allowing the counties to take advance of us. With a strong ethos but a little off of the main issue Trump brought up, Clinton reminded us we are only five perfect of the world, we have to trade with other countries. As the conversation went on, Clinton pointed out that making the wealth pay less has not worked before and will not work again. She used ethos appeal when throwing the fact that Trump was from a rich background and her family was a middle class working family. She then pointed out that we are a country that just got out of a recession, nine million people lost their jobs, five million lost homes and thirteen trillion dollars in family wealth was completely wiped out. Using another pathos appeal, she says that Trump was excited at the time to buy up all the houses. Trump didn’t look too good when he interrupted her by saying “that’s good business”. The rest of the debate was really attacking each other, a lot of politically incorrect arguing.

When Holt finally got the candidates back on track, he moved to issues about taxes. Clintons began the answer by really attacking Trump over his proposal. It was towards the very end of her two minutes that she stated her plan was to invest in the middle class, tax the higher income brackets, to lower debt for college in hopes that it would boost the economy. Trump fights back with attacking the Fed, saying they are acting more politically by keeping interest rates high.  Holt brings up the fact that Trump has not released his tax returns and ask Trump to comment on that. Trump really doesn’t give a worthy answer, instead he blames the fact that his taxes are being audited at the moment. Trying to appeal to the audience’s pathos, he then turns

 the table onto Clintons scandal involving the emails that suddenly disappeared and employees plead the fifth amendment when questioned. And kind of accidently, but arrogant, says that he will release his returns if Clinton releases the emails. Clinton responded with a strong pathos when she questioned if maybe Trump does not want to release because he has been lying about how much money he makes, how much he has donated, his business details, or even that he does not pay his taxes as he should. Trump, again, interrupts Clinton with a very bad “that makes me smart” defense. As Clinton continues, she only brushes off the email subject by saying she mistakenly used a personal email address and will not make the same mistake in the future. When Trumps turn rolls back around, he dismisses the tax returns by saying they do not truly show anything about his money. He goes on to talk about how the country is in “twenty twelve trillion dollars” in debt. Using ethos, he points of that the person running the country should know money, he knows how to not only handle it but make profit.

Holt kind of rushes onto the next segment due to being behind scheduled time. This section is about

race and how to close the extremely wide and bitter gap in America. Hilary relies on pathos when agreeing that the system is extremely racist and set up against the black community. Her plan is to retrain the police force, bring the community and law back into a good standing relationship and take guns from those who are on the watch list. Donald states his plan of bringing back the unconstitutional stop-and-frisk procedure that New York once used. Clinton rebutted this argument with logos, saying that the procedure would only increase the unfairness and hate for the law in the black and Spanish communities. Not too much was said in a political manner on how the close the gap and mend America’s racist issues after that, just more attacks on each other.

Holt guided the candidates to discuss their plans on security. Clinton’s response was how she suspects Russian in the latest cyber-attacks and how America should not stand for that. However, in her two minutes she does not really explain her plan to stop it. Instead she invites the audience to pathos when she talks about Trump inviting Putin, Russians president, to hack into our personal files. The rebut

Trump gave to Hillary’s accessions is that fact that we do not know who is behind the attacks, he even threw in “400 pound somebody in bed”. He tries to use ethos when he talked about how he was just endorsed by over two hundred admirals. His major logos appeal in this section is when he points out that Clinton has a plan to defeat ISIS on her web page, on the internet. Trump ends this section by stating he has a better temperament than Clinton does. Which, of course, Clinton rebutted with a slick comment “a man who can be provoked by a tweet shouldn’t have his ginger anywhere near the nuclear codes..”

The last segment that Holt leads the debate to is the nuclear weapon polices and the change of the long standing policy of not being first to use that Obama has brought up. Trump started off with logos, the fact that America is not ahead or even keeping up with other countries when it comes to nuclear

weapons. He does not truly answer the question of nuking first, but does say if it comes to nuclear war “its over” but is not willing to take the option off the table. Hillary states her plan is to not only stand up to bullies but also rebuild relationships with others to increase peace and prosperity.

Over all, I believe Hillary Clinton won this argument. But not because of the facts or plans for our future. But simply because she is a better political speaker, has many names to fall back on and has

been in the politics world for a very long time. She was extremely prepared for this debate, had a lot of facts to help her arguments, related to the American people multiple times, and didn’t interrupt. Being a business man, Trump did have a lot of ethos to use during this debate. However, the way Trump came off was unclear of his plans at times, rude as he interrupted not only Clinton but also Holt, unprepared and inappropriate with his side comments about his greed.

Youtube recording

fact checker transcript of debate

First Picture

Second Picture

Third Picture

Fourth Picture

Fifth Picture

Six picture

Seventh Picture

Phonom Penh Pro Sweatshop Arugment

Kristof begins his essay by addressing Obama and his team. He then goes on to describe
Phenom Penh as a Dante-like hell and offers to give a tour of the area. 

The problem he identifies is that sweatshops are not being exploited enough. Kristof assumes his readers are unaware of how the locals would prefer to work in a factory then scrounging for income.  His purpose in this essay is to allow the reader to see from the locals point of view on sweat shops and how it helps the families. 

In order to accomplish this purpose, he appeals mainly to pathos. He does this by quoting

some of the mothers saying they wish for the children to be able to work in a sweat shop with a steady income to help raise out of poverty. He also using pathos when stating how the train has ran over multiple children, the children cannot afford to go to the doctor and in the shade. He also appeals logos by stating that the sweat shops are safer for children to work in, smell better and cleaner.

In his essay, Kristof addresses the main argument against his thesis, the idea that labor standards can improve wages and working conditions without greatly affecting the eventual retail cost of goods. He refutes this argument by saying it is more likely that with high wages, the one hiring would often demand brides or some of the wages in order to get the job.

 Finally, he concludes by making the point that even though Americans find it hard to accept, the workers prefer the factory over the alternative work. Overall, the argument Kristof makes is effective because he is showing the positive effects the sweat shops have on the locals.

Where Sweatshops Are A Dream article (and middle picture)
First picture

Last picture

Media Gaming Argument

There is a big dispute on the effect of violent media on young children. This picture takes a huge stand on the negative views. 

mediaviolence.org "The Top Games of 2011 Include"
Practical Argument 2nd edition page 84

In the picture, the child is very focused in the game he is playing. his body is leaned forward as if he is trying to get as close as he can to the television, his eyes are wide with interest and his mouth relaxed as if he is not aware of his surroundings. The couch, the wall and the words are blurred out that the main focus is the child. The child's main focus is the game. There is sun light on the left side of his head showing that the child is playing the game by himself during the day instead of playing outside with the neighborhood kids or riding his bike.

Bulletstorm is set in the 26^th century era where it is also a first
 person shooting style made by Polish

     

Remedy Entertainment created
 Max Payne, who is an
 ex-cop out searching for revenge for
 the death of his family.

 The top left corner includes five of the top 2011 games according to CNBC. All games are high violence. For those, including myself, that are not aware of these games I have Rage by id Tech and Bulletstorm by Polish are both first person shooting games; Rage is post-apocalyptic setting while bullet is in the 26^th century era. Max Payne by Remedy Entertainment and Dues Ex by Edios Montreal are story line games that are about killing and searching for revenge of the deaths of loved ones.  

     I think that this visual argument has a strong pathos and ethos points. Showing a child not only inside during the day but so focused on electronics will make any parent  analyze what their own children are doing. Using a major label such as CNBC is a powerful ethos argument due to people tend to trust bigger names. 

Rage information

Credit for Bulletstorm picture and game information

Credit for Max Payne picture

Max Payne information 

Twisted Metal information

Dues Ex 3: Human Revolution information