Contrary to Heidt’s beliefs, in this essay, I will argue that the use of the word ‘flood’ and other water related metaphors to describe immigrants coming to America are inappropriate. First, I will examine a story from the Bible to illustrate how water related metaphors discourage the acceptance of immigrants in America. Second, I will reveal how a certain derogatory term makes the use of water related metaphors prejudicial. Lastly, I will analyze a political advertisement in which a candidate uses one of these metaphors to describe his anti-immigration views. The Bible story of Noah’s Ark is the reason water metaphors such as the ‘flood metaphor,’ discourage the acceptance of immigrants in America. In the religious tale, a man by the name of Noah, was called upon by God to build an ark. God instructed Noah to build the ark because of the “Great Flood” he was …show more content…
In recent years, it has been used by not only politicians, but also by the general public to describe immigrants ‘flowing’ into the United States. However, the way that the word is used in context is discouraging to those innocent individuals who come to America in search of a better life. The word “flood” dates back to the story of Noah’s Ark, in which a flood killed nearly the whole human race. Using the word ‘flood’ to describe people crossing America’s border not only has a negative connotation, but also dehumanizes people who might have good intentions for coming to the United States. These types of metaphors are prejudicial and is currently being used by political candidates who have anti-immigration views. This kind of negative connotation of the word ‘flood’ is inappropriate and unfair to be used as a means of explaining that immigrants are coming into the