3.5 Section Exercise Set I

September 17 marked the anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution. How well have we, the people, protected our rights? Consider what has happened to our private-property rights."Property has divine rights, and the moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, anarchy and tyranny begin." John Quincy Adams, 1767-1848, Sixth President of the United States.Taxes and regulations are the two-edged sword which gravely threatens the fabric of our capitalistic republic. The tyranny of which Adams speaks is with us today in the form of government regulators and regulations which have all but destroyed the right to own property. Can anarchy be far behind?

Appeal to unqualified authority; also, slippery slope

Doctors say the birth of a baby is a high point of being a doctor. Yet a medical survey shows one out of every nine obstetricians in America has stopped delivering babies.Expectant mothers have had to find new doctors. In some rural areas, women have had to travel elsewhere to give birth.How did this happen? It's part of the price of the lawsuit crisis.The number of lawsuits Americans file each year is on the rise. Obstetricians are among the hardest hit-almost three out of four have faced a malpractice claim. Many have decided it isn't worth the risk.

Begging the question

Evolution would have been dealt serious setbacks if environmentalists had been around over the eons trying to save endangered species.Species are endangered because they just do not fit the bigger picture any more as the world changes. That's not bad. It's just life.In most cases we have seen the "endangered species" argument is just a ruse; much deeper motives usually exist, and they are almost always selfish and personal.

Begging the question and/or weak analogy

The issue is not whether we should subsidize the arts, but whether anyone should be able to force someone else to subsidize the arts. You and I are free to give any amount of our money to any artistic endeavor we wish to support. When the government gets involved, however, a group of bureaucrats is given the power to take our money and give it to the arts they wish to support. We are not consulted. That is not a way to promote a responsible culture. That is tyranny.

Begging the question or suppressed evidence. Individual tax payers are never consulted as to how tax revenues should be allocated.

As the oldest of eleven children (all married), I'd like to point out our combined family numbers more than 100 who vote only for pro-life candidates. Pro-lifers have children, pro-choicers do not.

Appeal to force

How would you feel to see your children starving, and have all doors slammed in your face? Isn't it time that all of us who believe in freedom and human rights stop thinking in terms of color and national boundaries? We should open our arms and hearts to those less fortunate and remember that a time could come when we might be in a similar situation.

Appeal to pity

Pigeons are forced to leave our city to battle for life. Their struggle is an endless search for food. What manner of person would watch these hungry creatures suffer from want of food and deny them their survival? These helpless birds are too often ignored by the people of our city, with not the least bit of compassion shown to them. Pigeons are God's creatures just as the so-called human race is. They need help.

Appeal to pity

When will these upper-crust intellectuals realize that the masses of working people are not in cozy, cushy, interesting, challenging, well-paying jobs, professions and businesses? My husband is now 51; for most of the last 33 years he has worked in the same factory job, and only the thought of retiring at 62 has sustained him. When he reaches that age in 11 years, who will tell him that his aging and physically wracked body must keep going another two years? My heart cries out for all the poor souls who man the assembly lines, ride the trucks or work in the fields or mines, or in the poorly ventilated, hot-in-summer, cold-in-winter factories and garages. Many cannot afford to retire at 62, 65, or even later. Never, never let them extend the retirement age. It's a matter of survival to so many.

Appeal to pity

I say "bravo" and "right on!" Now we have some real-life humane heroes to look up to! These brave people [a group of animal liberators] went up against the insensitive bureaucratic technology, and won, saving former pet animals from senseless torture. If researchers want to experiment, let them use computers, or themselves- but not former pet animals! I know it's bad enough they use monkeys and rats, but if those animals are bred knowing nothing else but these Frankensteins abusing them it's different (but not better) than dogs or cats that have been loved and petted all their lives to suddenly be tortured and mutilated in the name of science. End all animal research! Free all research animals! Right on animal liberators!

Appeal to the people, direct variety. Also, appeal to pity? Begging the question? Does the fact that former pets were once loved make any difference?

People of the Philippines, I have returned! The hour of your redemption is here! Rally to me! Let the indomitable spirit of Bataan and Corregidor lead on! As the lines of battle roll forward to bring you within the zone of operations, rise and strike! For future generations of your sons and daughters, strike! Let no heart be faint! Let every arm be steeled! The guidance of divine God points the way! Follow in his name to the Holy Grail of righteous victory!

Appeal to the people, direct variety?

After reading "Homosexuals in the Churches," I'd like to point out that I don't know any serious, capable exegetes who stumble over Saint Paul's denunciation of homosexuality. Only a fool (and there seem to be more and more these days) can fail to understand the plain words of Romans, Chapter one. God did not make anyone "gay." Paul tells us in Romans 1 that homosexuals become that way because of their own lusts.

Appeal to unqualified authority.

Dear Ann: I was disappointed in your response to the girl whose mother used the strap on her. The gym teacher noticed the bruises on her legs and backside and called it "child abuse." Why are you against strapping a child when the Bible tells us in plain language that this is what parents should do? The Book of Proverbs mentions many times that the rod must be used. Proverbs 23:13 says: "Withhold not correction from the child for if thou beatest him with the rod he shall not die." Proverbs 23:14 says: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod and shalt deliver his soul from death." There is no substitute for a good whipping. I have seen the results of trying to reason with kids. They are arrogant, disrespectful and mouthy. Parents may wish for a more "humane" way, but there is none. Beating children is God's way of getting parents to gain control over their children.

Appeal to unqualified authority. Also, the last paragraph suggests a hasty generalization.

The fact is that the hype over "acid rain" and "global warming" is just that: hype. Take, for example, Stephen Schneider, author of Global Warming. In his current "study" he discusses a "greenhouse effect of catastrophic proportions," yet twenty years ago Schneider was a vocal proponent of the theory of a "new ice age."

Argument against the person, abusive

The Supreme Court recently ruled that a police department in Florida did not violate any rights of privacy when a police helicopter flew over the backyard of a suspected drug dealer and noticed marijuana growing on his property. Many people, including groups like the Anti-Common Logic Union, felt that the suspect's right to privacy outweighed the police department's need to protect the public at large.The simple idea of sacrificing a right to serve a greater good should be allowed in certain cases. In this particular case the danger to the public wasn't extremely large; marijuana is probably less dangerous than regular beer. But anything could have been in that backyard—a load of cocaine, an illegal stockpile of weapons, or other major threats to society.

Argument against the person, abusive (against the ACLU). Also, missing the point or begging the question. If the mere possibility of hidden contraband justifies a search, then won't all Fourth Amendment rights be destroyed?

The conservative diatribe found in campus journalism comes from the mouths of a handful of affluent brats who were spoon-fed through the '90s. Put them on an ethnically more diverse campus, rather than a Princeton or a Dartmouth, and then let us see how long their newspapers survive.

Argument against the person, abusive; argument against the person, circumstantial

I have one question for those bleeding hearts who say we should not have used the atomic bomb: if the nation responsible for the Rape of Nanking, the Manchurian atrocities, Pearl Harbor and the Bataan Death March had invented the bomb first, don't you think they would have used it? So do I.

Argument against the person, abusive; tu quoque; also, begging the question. Does the possibility that the Japanese would have used the atomic bomb against us justify our use of it against them?

The mainstream press finds itself left behind by talk radio, so they try to minimize its importance. Americans are finding the true spirit of democracy in community and national debate. Why should we be told what to believe by a news weekly or the nightly news when we can follow public debate as it unfolds on talk radio?

Argument against the person, circumstantial; also, begging the question. Are talk-show participants informed and unbiased spokespersons?

A capital gains tax [reduction] benefits everyone, not just the "rich", because everyone will have more money to invest or spend in the private economy, resulting in more jobs and increasing prosperity for all. This is certainly better than paying high taxes to a corrupt, self-serving and incompetent government that squanders our earnings on wasteful and useless programs.

Begging the question. Does money invested in the stock market actually produce jobs? Composition? The fact that some politicians are corrupt and self-serving does not mean that the whole government is. Hasty generalization? The fact that some programs are wasteful and useless does not mean that all of them are.

Women in military combat is insane. No society in its right mind would have such a policy. The military needs only young people and that means the only women who go are those in their child-bearing years. Kill them off and society will not be able to perpetuate itself.

Begging the question. Is it likely that every woman will enlist and that every one of those will be killed? Also possible straw man.

Why are people so shocked that Susan Smith apparently chose to kill her children because they had become an inconvenience? Doesn't this occur every day in abortion clinics across the country? We suspect Smith heard very clearly the message many feminists have been trying to deliver about the expendable nature of our children.

Begging the question. Is the fetus a child? Also, straw man.

As somebody who has experienced the tragedy of miscarriage—or spontaneous abortion—at eight weeks, I greatly resent the position that a fetus is not a baby. I went through the grief of losing a baby, and no one should tell me otherwise.

Begging the question. Just because your emotional reaction was that of losing a baby, does that mean the fetus is really a baby?

Why all the flap about atomic bombs? The potential for death is always with us. Of course, if you just want something to worry about, go ahead. Franklin D. Roosevelt said it: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

Begging the question. Must we all die prematurely in a nuclear holocaust? Also possibly red herring

The death penalty is the punishment for murder. Just as we have long jail terms for armed robbery, assault and battery, fraud, contempt of court, fines for speeding, reckless driving and other numerous traffic violations, so must we have a punishment for murder. Yes, the death penalty will not deter murders any more than a speeding ticket will deter violating speed laws again, but it is the punishment for such violation!

Begging the question. The argument appears to run in a circle.

When will they ever learn-that the Republican Party is not for the people who voted for it?

Complex question

Dear Ann:I've read that one aspirin taken every other day will reduce the risk of heart attack. Why not take two and double the protection?

Composition

If you buy our airline ticket now you can save 60%, and that means 60% more vacation for you.

Equivocation

Just as our parents did for us, my husband and I rely solely on Christian Science for all the health needs of our four sons and find it invaluable for the quick cure of whatever ailments and contagions they are subject to. One particular healing that comes to mind happened several years ago when our youngest was a toddler. He had a flu-type illness that suddenly became quite serious. We called a Christian Science practitioner for treatment and he was completely well the next morning.

False cause (post hoc ergo propter hoc)

I prayed for the U.S. Senate to defeat the prayer amendment—and it did. There is a God.

False cause (post hoc ergo propter hoc). But the argument is almost certainly whimsical or facetious.

You take half of the American population every night and set them down in front of a screen watching people getting stabbed, shot and blown away. And then you expect them to go out into the streets hugging each other?

False cause? No fallacy?

Would you rather invest in our nation's children or Pentagon waste? The choice is yours.

False dichotomy

So you want to ban smoking in all eating establishments? Well, you go right ahead and do that little thing. And when the 40 percent of smokers stop eating out, the restaurants can do one of two things: close, or raise the price of a $20 dinner 40 percent to $28.

False dichotomy; also, begging the question and/or false cause. Will a smoking ban in restaurants actually cause smokers to stay away?

As corporate farms continue to gobble up smaller family farms, they control a larger percentage of the grain and produce raised in the United States. Some have already reached a point in size where, if they should decide to withhold their grain and produce from the marketplace, spot shortages could occur and higher prices would result. The choice is to pay us family farmers now or pay the corporations later.

False dichotomy? No fallacy?

What's wrong with kids today? Answer: nothing, for the majority of them. They are great. Witness the action of two San Diego teenage boys recently, when the Normal Heights fire was at its worst. They took a garden hose to the roof of a threatened house-a house belonging to four elderly sisters, people they didn't even know. They saved the house, while neighboring houses burned to the ground.In the Baldwin Hills fire, two teenage girls rescued a blind, retired Navy man from sure death when they braved the flames to find him, confused, outside his burning house. He would probably have perished if they hadn't run a distance to rescue him.

Hasty generalization

I am twelve years old. My class had a discussion on whether police used unnecessary force when arresting the people from Operation Rescue.My teacher is an ex-cop, and he demonstrated police holds to us. They don't hurt at all unless the person is struggling or trying to pull away. If anybody was hurt when they were arrested, then they must have been struggling with the officers trying to arrest them.

Hasty generalization and/or weak analogy

I am 79 and have been smoking for 60 years. My husband is 90 and has inhaled my smoke for some 50 years with no bad effects. I see no reason to take further steps to isolate smokers in our restaurants and public places, other than we now observe. Smokers have taken punishment enough from neurotic sniffers, some of whom belong in bubbles. There are plenty of injudicious fumes on our streets and freeways.

Hasty generalization. Also, argument against the person, abusive? Also, begging the question or red herring?

So you think that putting the worst type of criminal out of his misery is wrong. How about the Americans who were sent to Korea, to Vietnam, to Beirut, to Central America? Thousands of good men were sacrificed supposedly for the good of our country. At the same time we were saving and protecting Charles Manson, Sirhan Sirhan [Robert Kennedy's murderer], and a whole raft of others too numerous to mention.

Missing the point or red herring; also, begging the question?

Exporting cigarettes [to Asia] is good business for America; there is no reason we should be prohibited from doing so. Asians have been smoking for decades; we are only offering variety in their habit. If the Asians made tobacco smoking illegal, that would be a different situation. But as long as it is legal, the decision is up to the smokers. The Asians are just afraid of American supremacy in the tobacco industries.

Missing the point, begging the question, or suppressed evidence. Is any activity justified by the mere fact that it amounts to good business? Also, the arguer ignores the moral question of exporting a product that kills its users.

How can we pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and not establish laws to punish people who burn the flag to make a statement? We are a people who punish an individual who libels another person, but will not seek redress from an individual who insults every citizen of this great country by desecrating the flag.

Missing the point. Pledging allegiance to the flag is a symbolic statement of support for the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression--including flag burning. Also, weak analogy (between flag burning and libel)

The Fourth Amendment guarantees our right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. It does not prohibit reasonable search and seizure. The matter of sobriety roadblocks to stop drunk drivers boils down to this: Are such roadblocks reasonable or unreasonable? The majority of people answer: "Reasonable." Therefore, sobriety roadblocks should not be considered to be unconstitutional.

Missing the point. Whether such roadblocks are reasonable or unreasonable is a question for the courts to decide--not the general public. Also, possibly appeal to the people.

The American Civil Liberties Union did a study that found that in the last 80 years it believes twenty-five innocent people have been executed in the United States. This is unfortunate. But, there are innocent people who die each year in highway accidents. Out of 40,000 deaths, how many deaths are related to driving while intoxicated? How many more thousands are injured and incur financial ruin or are invalids and handicapped for the remainder of their lives?

Missing the point; red herring; also, begging the question?

Most Americans do not favor gun control. They know that their well-being depends on their own ability to protect themselves. So-called "assault rifles" are used in few crimes. They are not the weapon of choice of criminals, but they are for people trying to protect themselves from government troops.

Suppressed evidence. Even though assault rifles might be used in few crimes, when they are used, they often inflict tremendous damage. Begging the question. Is it likely that we will ever be justified in using assault rifles against government troops?

A parent would never give a ten-year-old the car keys, fix him or her a martini or let him or her wander at night through a dangerous part of town. The same holds true of the Internet. Watch what children access, but leave the Net alone. Regulation is no substitute for responsibility.

No fallacy? Weak analogy?

We've often heard the saying, "Far better to let 100 guilty men go free than to condemn one innocent man." What happens then if we apply the logic of this argument to the question, "Is a fetus an unborn human being?" Then is it not better to let 100 fetuses be born rather than to mistakenly kill one unborn human being? This line of reasoning is a strictly humanist argument against abortion.

No fallacy? Weak analogy?

I couldn't help but compare the ducks in Fairbanks, Alaska, who refuse to fly south for the winter to our welfare system. Instead of going south, four ducks have set up housekeeping there because people keep feeding them. The biologist dealing with the ducks said that while it's nice that people are concerned, in the long run it isn't good for the ducks because it conditions them to stay when they need to get to warmer temperatures. Our welfare system, in many instances, conditions people to stay on welfare. Compassion is a wonderful virtue, and we need to help people who need help, but is it compassionate to keep people on welfare who should be developing and using their God-given abilities to do for themselves what the government is doing for them?

Probably no fallacy. The analogy is not so much between ducks and people as between the relationship that the ducks have with their feeders and the relationship that welfare recipients have with the welfare system.

The notion of "buying American" is as misguided as the notion of buying Wisconsin, or Oshkosh, Wisconsin, or South Oshkosh, Wisconsin. For the same reasons that Wisconsin increases its standard of living by trading with the rest of the nation, America increases its standard of living by trading with the rest of the world.

Suppressed evidence? Composition? Begging the question? No fallacy? The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and pertinent federal legislation prohibits unfair trade practices between states. No equivalent regulations exist for international trade.

If a car or truck kills a person, do politicians call for car control or truck control? And call in all cars/trucks?If a child burns down a house do we have match control or child control and call in all of each? Gun control and confiscation is equally as pathetic a thought process in an age of supposed intelligence.

Several cases of weak analogy; also, argument against the person, abusive?

I see that our courts are being asked to rule on the propriety of outlawing video games as a "waste of time and money."It seems that we may be onto something here. A favorable ruling would open the door to new laws eliminating show business, spectator sports, cocktail lounges, the state of Nevada, public education and, of course, the entire federal bureaucracy. (A. G. Dobrin)

Slippery slope

If the advocates of prayers in public schools win on this issue, just where will it end? Perhaps next they will ask for prayers on public transportation? Prayers by government workers before they start their job each day? Or maybe, mandatory prayers in public restaurants before starting each meal might be a good idea.

Slippery slope

Now that Big Brother has decided that I must wear a seatbelt when I ride in a car, how long will it take before I have to wear an inner tube when I swim in my pool, a safety harness when I climb a ladder, and shoes with steel-reinforced toe caps when I carry out the garbage?

Slippery slope

In our society it is generally considered improper for a man to sleep, shower, and dress amid a group of women to whom he normally would be sexually attracted. It seems to me, then, to be equally unacceptable that a gay man sleep, shower, and dress in a company of men to whom, we assume, he would be no less sexually attracted.

Suppressed evidence? Men and women usually differ in physical strength. Begging the question? Is it likely that physical attraction will lead to injury or rape? No fallacy?

Mexico's president expresses legitimate concern when he questions supplying oil to Americans who are unwilling to apply "discipline" in oil consumption. In view of the fact that his country's population is expected to double in only twenty-two years, isn't it legitimate for us to ask when Mexicans will apply the discipline necessary to control population growth and quit dumping their excess millions over our borders?

Tu quoque

Dear Ann:Recently I was shopping downtown in 20-below-zero weather. A stranger walked up to me and said, "I wonder how many beautiful rabbits died so you could have that coat?" I noticed she was wearing a down coat, so I asked if the geese they got the down from to make her coat were still alive. She looked surprised. Obviously she had never given it a thought. If people are so upset about cruelty to animals, why don't they go after the folks who refuse to spend the money to have their pets neutered and spayed? Thousands of dogs are put to death every year because the animal pounds can't feed and house them. Talk about cruelty to animals, that's the best example there is.

Tu quoque. Also, red herring

I was incensed to read in your article about the return of anti-Semitism that New York City Moral Majority Leader Rev. Dan C. Fore actually said that "Jews have a God-given ability to make money, almost a supernatural ability . . ." I find it incredibly ironic that he and other Moral Majority types conveniently overlook the fact that they, too, pack away a pretty tidy sum themselves through their fund-raising efforts. It is sad that anti-Semitism exists, but to have this prejudice voiced by leaders of religious organizations is deplorable. These people are in for quite a surprise come Judgment Day.

Tu quoque; also, appeal to force?

My gun has protected me, and my son's gun taught him safety and responsibility long before he got hold of a far more lethal weapon—the family car. Cigarettes kill many times more people yearly than guns and, unlike guns, have absolutely no redeeming qualities. If John Lennon had died a long, painful and expensive death from lung cancer, would you have devoted a page to a harangue against the product of some of your biggest advertisers—the cigarette companies?

Two cases of weak analogy; also, argument against the person, circumstantial

The problem that I have with the pro-choice supporters' argument is that they make "choice" the ultimate issue. Let's face facts. No one has absolute freedom of choice sanctioned by the law. One can choose to rob a bank, but it's not lawful. Others can choose to kill their one-year-old child, but it is not legal. Why then should a woman have the legal right to take the life of her unborn child?

Weak analogy and/or red herring; also, begging the question. Is the fetus a child?

There is something very wrong about the custom of tipping. When we go to a store, we don't decide what a product is worth and pay what we please; we pay the price or we leave. Prices in coffee bars and restaurants should be raised, waiters should be paid a decent wage, and the words "no tipping" should be clearly visible on menus and at counters.

Weak analogy? No fallacy?

Before I came to the United States in July, 1922, I was in Berlin where I visited the famous zoo. In one of the large cages were a lion and a tiger. Both respected each other's strength. It occurred to me that it was a good illustration of "balance of power." Each beast followed the other and watched each other's moves. When one moved, the other did. When one stopped, the other stopped.In today's world, big powers or groups of powers are trying to maintain the status quo, trying to be as strong as or stronger than the other. They realize a conflict may result in mutual destruction. As long as the countries believe there is a balance of power we may hope for peace.

Weak analogy

Holding a gun, a thief robs John Q. Public of thousands of dollars. Holding a baby, an unmarried mother robs taxpayers of thousands of dollars. If one behavior is considered a crime, then so should the other.

Weak analogy

Who are these Supreme Court justices who have the guts to OK the burning of our flag? If the wife or daughter of these so-called justices were raped, could the rapist be exonerated because he took the First Amendment? That he was just expressing himself? How about murder in the same situation?

Weak analogy

Since when did military service become a right, for gays or anyone else? The military has always been allowed to discriminate against people who don't meet its requirements, including those who are overweight or too tall or too short. There is an adequate supply of personnel with the characteristics they need. And there is no national need for gays in the military.

Weak analogy (between being overweight, too tall, or too short—which require special uniforms—and being gay)