Critical Reading — Jesse Samaritano

RenewAmerica.com – Don’t give your heart away

An admission of ignorance

  • States the fact that she is pro-life. Making this claim as the first sentence shows that her opinion is already to one side of the argument.
  • “My initial interest was in federal domestic and foreign population control programs and later eugenic abortion, sex initiation programs in public and parochial schools, human embryo and fetal experimentation, and euthanasia… In 1972, I founded the U.S. Coalition for Life as an international pro-life research agency and six years later, with the assistance of the Dr. Jerome Lejeune of the University of Paris, I established the International Foundation for Genetic Research, popularly known as the Michael Fund, as the prolife alternative to the March of Dimes. I have written three books dealing with pro-life issues.”She gives evidence of her long stand for pro-life issues but no evidence of organ transplant knowledge.
  • She then goes on to admit to formerly having no knowledge of the “evils” of organ transplant, but that her eyes have been opened through help of a neonatologist Dr. Paul Byrne .
  • The author states her argument in the title or the article but doesn’t follow up or make a claim referring to the point of her article.

The organ donor industry

  • “Like the abortion industry, the vital organ transplantation industry rests on the utilitarian principle that the end justifies the means.”The author make a comparison between the abortion industry and the vital organ transplant industry as her first point in her argument then goes onto claim that again like the abortion industry,  the motive between both industries is “hard, cold cash.” She provides no evidence to this bold claim to sway the reader on her side.
  • She then makes a person attack on the surgeons  that perform the vital organ transplant  procedures by making the inference that they are killers, which would infer that they are murdering their patients. This claim does not do anything for her argument. they are all empty claims that are coming from an author that is making herself come off as ignorant and angry about something she doesn’t know what shes talking about.
This entry was posted in Critical Reading SP19. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s