Rhetorical Analysis of Liberals Think that Only Liberals Can Boycott and Protest
Ryan T. Anderson, a member of The Heritage Foundation, wrote an article regarding the hypocrisy of liberals and how religious freedom is under attack. The article, “Liberals Think that Only Liberals Can Boycott and Protest” begins with stereotypes and ad hominem by generalizing and attacking a group of people. He suggests that all liberals do not have standards. He uses a false analogy and emotional fallacies to support his claims. Anderson’s article has little evidence to support its claims and attempts to use an ethos appeal by arguing the United States’ religious freedoms are under attack by liberals and companies.
Anderson starts the article with an ad Hominem, “If it wasn’t for double standards, some liberals would have none at all.” (Anderson, par. 1). The author uses a few quotes and does not use statics to prove his argument. The article states liberals and companies are hypocrites because they boycotted North Carolina and Mississippi in response to the bathroom and business bans of the LGBTQ community. Anderson describes how celebrities boycotting these states are the equivalent of a business denying service to an individual based on sexual orientation. Anderson cites how PayPal has boycotted North Carolina …show more content…
He is not trying to persuade an audience to his point of view. He does not use a lot of evidence to persuade his audience to believe in what he is saying. He uses an ethos appeal by stating that individual’s religious freedoms are under attack because companies are boycotting states that are refusing service to the LGBQT community. His audience already shares his beliefs in not serving the LGBQT community under the premise of religious freedom. The tone of his article is informal, for example, he uses terms like ‘big business’ in his article. His article would not convince anyone to change their position on the LGBQT
Ryan T. Anderson, a member of The Heritage Foundation, wrote an article regarding the hypocrisy of liberals and how religious freedom is under attack. The article, “Liberals Think that Only Liberals Can Boycott and Protest” begins with stereotypes and ad hominem by generalizing and attacking a group of people. He suggests that all liberals do not have standards. He uses a false analogy and emotional fallacies to support his claims. Anderson’s article has little evidence to support its claims and attempts to use an ethos appeal by arguing the United States’ religious freedoms are under attack by liberals and companies.
Anderson starts the article with an ad Hominem, “If it wasn’t for double standards, some liberals would have none at all.” (Anderson, par. 1). The author uses a few quotes and does not use statics to prove his argument. The article states liberals and companies are hypocrites because they boycotted North Carolina and Mississippi in response to the bathroom and business bans of the LGBTQ community. Anderson describes how celebrities boycotting these states are the equivalent of a business denying service to an individual based on sexual orientation. Anderson cites how PayPal has boycotted North Carolina …show more content…
He is not trying to persuade an audience to his point of view. He does not use a lot of evidence to persuade his audience to believe in what he is saying. He uses an ethos appeal by stating that individual’s religious freedoms are under attack because companies are boycotting states that are refusing service to the LGBQT community. His audience already shares his beliefs in not serving the LGBQT community under the premise of religious freedom. The tone of his article is informal, for example, he uses terms like ‘big business’ in his article. His article would not convince anyone to change their position on the LGBQT