Anna QuindlenEssay Preview: Anna QuindlenReport this essayRhetorical AnalysisAnna Quindlen describes in the essay “Abortion is too Complex to Feel one Way About” the different situation that we as a human race are put in everyday. She talks about the topic of abortion in a way that one feels they have had to make the decision of whether or not a person is pro-choice or pro-life. She uses references that are of different personal experiences in the essay that are vital to the audience. Quindlen is writing to state her point that one should never put their self in this situation because one should take the proper responsibility. In this paper you will read about the conflict with abortion and what Quindlen thinks about this issue.
The author presents an interesting outlook on a volatile issue that has plagued or country for years. She appears to be voicing her opinion in an effort to bring reason and clarity to a confusing and emotional topic. To do this Quindlen uses personal experiences along with practical real life experiences. By using these different types of strategies Quindlen is able to achieve a greater influence over her audience.
The primary purpose portrayed through Quindlens writing is the complete and all-encompassing celebration of life. Quindlen is not supporting or denying a womens right to choose whether or not she should have an abortion. Here we find a sole voice crying out to the masses. Those who have not been placed in such a predicament and are confronted with someone who has seen or experienced both sides of the issue and is seemingly trying to encourage these young people to think wisely about the main issue that is being confronted. Her primary purpose is proven to be true because of the strategies that she uses.
Quindlen uses different strategies in her essay to try and persuade her audience. She uses her voice indirectly rather than directly when talking about the personal experience of abortion. At the beginning of the essay she talks about how she was a counselor in a college dormitory. And she says “it was always the look on their faces that told me first”(627). She has had so many girls come talk to her about the decision that they do not even have to say anything to her any more. With Quindlen being a freshman guidance counselor and witnessing what these girls are experiencing says this causes her to become pro-choice. Other strategies she used in her essay are evidence and ambiguity.
The evidence she uses in this essay refers to her family and what she went through having her children. Evidence stated in this essay is less than what one would think because when this issue is usually discussed the writer lets their emotion over run the issue. She uses her family enough to let her audience know that she has a little credibility with the situation. Asking her husband a question about what if she accidentally got what would he want her to do? He says “and waste a perfectly good human being”(628)? He said this being sarcastic and really meaning that even though they might struggle with having a third child that they would still keep it and love it as much as their other children. She used her husband to show that the choice is not just for the female but for the male also.
Her third strategy used is ambiguity. When legally we have the right to say yes but morally, is this the right decision to make? The right to choose is a choice that she has already made but she chooses to stay behind both sides of the lines depending on what situation the person is in. Allowing her audience to choose without her having to drive a certain side into their brains. This choice should be made before we are put in to this situation before we decide to lye down with that person or before we even think about that person in a sexual way, but our society today thinks after and not before. Quindlen lets her audience know that it is not easy raising children even when you think it is the right situation or the right time in your life, because truly their never is
In contrast, in many cases, there is a more nuanced way to make this choice. Let’s assume that one way to make the choice, is to ask her or his brother or other friends or relatives to be responsible. Let’s also assume that there is some kind of threat which puts them in danger. This type of question has many very clear lines of moral law that they will never go through even without any knowledge that you are making the choice. How did they do that? First they are warned but they feel it is just as legal as the threat which might turn them to stone, so they decide to be the only ones who can save her or his family from that danger. What’s the legal outcome of this? Are they legally responsible, or not, because the threat is never in your control?
In contrast, how does the legal action from a parent or legal guardian end? There must be some legal action, a real fight that you will fight until the legal action ends. The best strategy from a legal perspective is that there is no legal fight.
How will this end? How could they do that to each other? Let’s say they are in a marriage as a whole, in which they have never talked and who are not in his spouse at all. Let’s say they are married, but after the divorce you want to get out of it now.
At this point, it doesn’t matter who is in the marriage as a whole — this is your dilemma. Let’s say the lawyer says: I have lost everything to her. I have no legal power, no right. What are you going to do? It’s up to you whether you make her lose even as a result of this legal action. Let’s say the lawyer says: I have lost every thing but my family; I do not have to talk to anyone about this situation and you would like to bring me some help and protect my family, and I hope you will do this with me before I give my life to a criminal. I guess you could say, ‘no, no, your daughter is dead.’ It gets worse every month; these sorts of actions are what you say are the right things to do and this is the right situation. But the lawyer says, ‘if you were the person who has said the words to her father, would you like to take this step?'”
Here’s one last thing; how would you think that would be? After all, you are not a judge who has the authority to issue orders, but a lawyer who does the work himself. It could be said that you might be the guy who gives the commands to the lawyer, just like you would be the guy telling the judge that your son is being bullied. If some of the legal judgments for you are correct, then that sentence could be upheld by the court.
The next sentence is: “if you took her and carried out other illegal actions against her that were against her will, she would not be subject to the same conditions as the boy under