Table of ContentsIntroductionViolent Approaches to Combating AbortionConclusionIntroduction The topic of abortion rarely comes up without sparking heated arguments and conflicting emotions. On the one hand, pro-choice groups defend women's rights to manage their own bodies. In contrast, pro-lifers condemn abortion as murder, especially those who are religiously affiliated. Religious pro-lifers believe that God commands people not to kill. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay This means, in their eyes, that abortion is a grave sin. While such aversion to sin is understandable, there is a problem: Pro-lifers may look to the worst cases of abortion as proof of their position. By presenting the dramatic flaws of abortion, pro-lifers increase conflict instead of decreasing it. Some may not even realize what they are doing. In this time of ethical turmoil, an evangelical magazine is stepping forward to bring attention back to an important concept. Violent Approaches to Combating Abortion Christianity Today's Editorial, "An Everyday Scandal," Uses Strong diction, Evidence, Images, and Identification with Religious Beliefs to Show Pro-Life Evangelical Christians Why Treat Others with love and respect is more important in the fight for life than relying on shocking reports of abortion gone wrong. The first paragraph of the editorial presents abortion in a negative light through strong diction. Phrases such as “forever hiding beneath the currents of American life,” “sometimes roars to the surface,” and “sleeping giant” urge the reader with a strange sense of foreboding (168). These words form an analogy comparing abortion to a monster that waits, just out of sight, until it can rear its ugly head and wreak havoc. Abortion, like many modern issues, tends to make headlines for short periods of time before going to rest – for now, of course. All it takes is one explosive headline for abortion to take center stage. conflict once again. Like a creature of disaster, she calmly awaits her next opportunity to provoke fiery debates on human rights. The editorial includes this choice of words to show how truly destructive negativity is to the fight against abortion. The pro-life and pro-choice sides become increasingly bitter and defensive with each extreme case, resulting in a greater reluctance to compromise. Christianity Today aims to convey the monstrous qualities of abortion from the beginning of the editorial in a way that foreshadows the evil of sacrificing respect and love for aggression. Strong diction also comes into play at the end of the editorial. The last paragraph is content with a simple reminder of the sinful aspects of abortion. He then describes an abortionist's tools as ranging from "immaculate or contaminated [to] wielded with surgical delicacy or barbaric cruelty" (170). Christianity Today shows both ends of the abortion spectrum through this use of inflammatory language. The community of evangelical Christians reading this editorial is most likely aware that abortion can range from a first-rate procedure to a bloody and possibly fatal sequence of events. Comparing the tools used by abortionists around the world serves to persuade evangelicals that, regardless of the precautions taken to abort properly (or lack thereof), abortion still destroys the creations ofGod and therefore should not be tolerated. Additionally, the comparison reminds readers that there are two sides to abortion, but that evangelicals should not focus only on the worst of them. Around the middle of the editorial, the authors engage in the use of evidence to show readers in Christianity today the types of abortions. facts that pro-lifers can use to attack abortion. The first example deals with the sinister case of Kermit Gosnell, a Philadelphia abortionist, whose "clinic stank of cat urine... was run by unlicensed apprentices, spattered with bloodstains and cluttered with unsterilized instruments and of a stock of fetal body parts” (168). The authors of the editorial provide their readers with this morbid piece of evidence to argue that abortionists like Kermit Gosnell are a very real part of the barbaric hallmarks of abortion. The description of bloodstains, fetal body parts, and the smell of cat urine pushes the senses in a way that the writers want readers to remember. This incorporation of disturbing facts gives evangelicals an example of the revolting scenarios they should avoid as the basis of their argument against abortion. The editorial provides further evidence when it discusses a pro-life organization called Live Action. Live Action seeks to undermine abortion by secretly filming abortion clinic workers, revealing several inappropriate behaviors. In the videos, a Live Action associate can be seen posing as the owner of an “underage prostitution ring” – a crooked enterprise that relies heavily on abortions and treatment for health problems and related needs. to prostitution (169). This concrete example of abortion being used for evil purposes is included by Christianity Today to fuel the disgust already aroused among its readers. This resentment is evidence of the extreme negativity it adds to the abortion debate. Writers want their audience to feel this for themselves as they read. Evidence of exploring the dark side of abortion indicates to evangelicals that inflicting injury on abortion choice supporters will make pro-lifers appear unethical and deceptive. Christianity Today then identifies with its readers by making religious statements about how Christians view abortion around the world. in accordance with their beliefs. Because the world so passionately supports abortion rights, people, like Christians, who oppose these pro-choice views often face harsh criticism. In these moments of frustration, the editorial explains, “we must continue to contemplate […] the most central theme of love: how our words and actions reflect love of our neighbor, born and unborn” (169 ). It is part of the Christian belief to turn the other cheek, even if a situation may be most unbearable. The editorial thus creates a common thread with its audience of defenders of the protection of innocent lives. He acknowledges a sense of helplessness shared with the public while persuading evangelicals to follow their religion by spreading love among all, regardless of their stance on abortion. The editorial shows evangelicals that they are not alone. The editorial further identifies with Christians opposed to abortion by discussing a core belief of Christianity. After explaining that it is impossible to stop abortion once and for all, the editorial states that “no one repents of his wickedness without a prick to the conscience” (169). This Christian belief supports the motivations of the public in their fight against the sin of..