Today's edition of the New York Times featured an article, A Flood of Suits Fights Coverage of Birth Control, where Ethan Bronner analyzes the two sides to the argument of whether or not health insurance should cover the costs of contraception. He acknowledges the fact that the issue is beginning to grow and will most likely eventually reach the Surpreme Court. After the speaker on Wednesday I found this article very interesting due to its connection with the topic of Supreme Court cases. Bronner immediately introduces the topic as a controversial issue due to religious views. He sets up the contrasting arguments that the guaranteed coverage of contraception is against certain religious views opposed to the thought that it is necessary and just. He backed each side with statements of different supporters. Although the religious fight against contraception is obvious to many, Bronner includes quotations to have fair support to each side. For example Bronner quotes Mr. Greene when he writes, “Our family is now being forced to choose between following the laws of the land that we love or maintaining the religious beliefs that have made our business successful and have supported our family and thousands of our employees and their families. We simply cannot abandon our religious beliefs to comply with this mandate.” As opposed to simply explaining the opinions of those who support the religious ideas, Bronner includes a direct quotation to act on pathos. However, Bronner also makes a pathos contribution to the other side of the case when he quotes Judy Waxman, a vice president of the national Women's Law center, "Ninety-nine percent of women use contraceptives at some time in their lives. There is a strong and legitimate government interest because it affects the health of women and babies.” The fact that Bronner creates a balanced description of both side forms a information article that demonstrates the entire case without a biased impact.
No comments:
Post a Comment