Persuasion
June 7, 2009
- by Kyle Cupp
In a recent post on abortion, George wrote:
There are those who think the Truth should be sugar-coated or watered down to make it more pleasant-sounding to others who are not willing to accept the Truth.
Certainly, all persons deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. We do not advocate violence, hatred, or ill-will of any kind to persons who do not receive the Truth. However, that does not change the mandate.
I don’t advocate sugar-coated or watered down language when speaking about the abortion procedure or those who defend or practice it; however, I believe we pro-lifers could do better at using language ordered toward persuasion. In the last few days, I’ve noted not a few instances of people remarking that they hold a pro-life legal philosophy, but shun the pro-life movement because of what they see as its use of divisive and alienating language. Not every complaint may be worth our attention, but some of these complaints have a valid point.
It’s a standard rule of debate that you present the opposing side in a way the opposition would agree is accurate, yet many of the descriptions pro-lifers use to depict the other side fail to correspond to what the other side actually holds. Inaccurate and demeaning terms such as “abortion enthusiast,” “baby-hater,” and “bloodthirsty baby-killer” don’t advance the discussion; they bring it to a grinding halt and convince abortion rights advocates not to give us the time of day. Such rhetoric also alienates potential friends.
Our language will not always persuade, but persuasion should be its purpose. There’s no clear formula to persuasion, as what persuades one person may not persuade another, but in general persuasive language is accurate, clear, and true. Sugar-coated or watered-down language, on the other hand, is inaccurate, obscure, and false. Ultimately, it’s counter-productive. So is language that demonizes and alienates.
Kyle Cupp is an independant contributor to MetroCatholic publications. Kyle publishes the blog Journeys in Alterity, which features his thoughts on culture, hermeneutics, language, literature, moral dilemmas, personal life, philosophy, politics, postmodernism, and religion.
Comments
2 Responses to “Persuasion”
Got something to say?
Latest Posts
- CHA spent over $1 million lobbying for Obamacare
- CCHD “Stations of the Cross” advertises for pro-gay marriage, pro-abort groups
- Archbishop Chaput: Health care bill doesn’t meet moral standards
- One More Life
- Social Obligations, Charity, and the State
- Archbishop Chaput: health care bill doesn’t meet minimum moral standards
- Planned Parenthood distributes sexually explicit brochures at Girl Scout meeting
- Rhode Island woman who survived earthquake in Haiti says crisis still ‘not over’
- Catholics Urged to Picket Cdl. Mahony’s Faith-Subverting Dissent-Fest
- Project Rachel Founder to speak in Fond du Lac about The Biochemistry of Attraction
Recent Comments
- Megan:Thanks, Chad! And yes, God is
- Chad Simpson:Goosebumps!!!!!!!!!! Congratu
- Mary McCurry:First it was Notre Dame and Ob
- Sallie Ruttan:Sr. Carol Keehan, How could y
- Boyd Stewart:How dare a Catholic side with
- Mary:Ever hear of the bible? His o
- Mary:Ever hear of the bible, idiot?
- Lori Miller:I have Marybeth to thank for t
- Trisha:Lori, This is so good, grea
- Daniel Stockdale:Sister's calls "Americans with
Most Popular DFW Catholic Posts
- Links Coming Soon!
Kyle, thanks as always for an additional (note I did not say alternate) perspective.
Although my commentwas made under a specific title, it was and is intended be more general than limited to “the abortion procedure” although it does include that.
I think we are on the same page with the following exception.
I am not in favor of viewing either “side” holistically.
Not all abortion proponents are equal in their thinking and reasoning.
The same holds true for life proponents.
I definitely agree that we should try to be persuasive. This is for the good of unborn children and for the good of the souls of all. I maintain that truth, especially The Truth must be maintained.
An example http://www.dfwcatholic.org/editorial-science-and-human-beings/.html
I am not in favor of viewing either “side” holistically.
Not all abortion proponents are equal in their thinking and reasoning.
The same holds true for life proponents.
True. The word “side” has severe limitations, especially in the debate over abortion, where we can’t really say that there are only two sides. Multiple positions are maintained.