Rhetorical Analysis Of Pope Francis's Speech
Some think that an eye for an eye is an effective means of punishment, but others believe that such means of punishment are not effective in today's society. In the United States, thirty-three states are currently using the death penalty. Kelly Gissendaner is being executed by lethal injection after the Supreme court denies her stay in life in prison for the murder of her husband in February 1997.
The death penalty is a highly controversial topic, one that separates and unites people from all over. People are against the death penalty because they believe it is immoral and it isn’t right to take someone else’s life, which Pope Francis made it clear when he stated, “Every life is sacred” when giving his speech to congress and stating how the …show more content…
Francis also stated, “Every human person is blessed with an absolute dignity, and society can only comfort from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes.” The intended audience would be religious people as well as some democrats and republicans because statistics show 57% percent of democrats are against it and only 24% republicans are. Pope Francis uses the rhetorical appeal of logos in his speech.
Francis argument about the death penalty is effective because of his use of logos. The speech is logically laid out and easy to follow, and it’s easier to understand because it is dialogic. Francis used the golden rule by suggesting the audience to treat others as they would want to be treated giving people “responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of growth.” The pope quickly stated he felt that was meant towards those who have been sentenced for …show more content…
When a reader compares the two statements, it is clear that Cruz uses all three of the rhetorical appeals in his speech, however, Francis use of all three rhetorical appeals is a little harder to see. Cruze uses pathos in his article to make the reader sympathize with the victims of these crimes; whereas Francis uses pathos to try and make the reader sympathize with those that commit these crimes. Both Cruz and Francis use pathos successfully, but Pope Francis has an easier time making readers feel sympathy for the
The death penalty is a highly controversial topic, one that separates and unites people from all over. People are against the death penalty because they believe it is immoral and it isn’t right to take someone else’s life, which Pope Francis made it clear when he stated, “Every life is sacred” when giving his speech to congress and stating how the …show more content…
Francis also stated, “Every human person is blessed with an absolute dignity, and society can only comfort from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes.” The intended audience would be religious people as well as some democrats and republicans because statistics show 57% percent of democrats are against it and only 24% republicans are. Pope Francis uses the rhetorical appeal of logos in his speech.
Francis argument about the death penalty is effective because of his use of logos. The speech is logically laid out and easy to follow, and it’s easier to understand because it is dialogic. Francis used the golden rule by suggesting the audience to treat others as they would want to be treated giving people “responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of growth.” The pope quickly stated he felt that was meant towards those who have been sentenced for …show more content…
When a reader compares the two statements, it is clear that Cruz uses all three of the rhetorical appeals in his speech, however, Francis use of all three rhetorical appeals is a little harder to see. Cruze uses pathos in his article to make the reader sympathize with the victims of these crimes; whereas Francis uses pathos to try and make the reader sympathize with those that commit these crimes. Both Cruz and Francis use pathos successfully, but Pope Francis has an easier time making readers feel sympathy for the