January 30, 2014 - Writing an Editorial

I can write an effective editorial about gay marriage that include a clear claim and at least two types of evidence.  

To do this I must understand that an effective editorial has a hook that gets the reader's attention, a concise claim that clearly states my opinion, and I should back my opinion up with strong, compelling evidence.   Remember to organize your writing (instructions below).

I will demonstrate this by writing an effective editorial about gay marriage. 

Notes on Organizing an editorial: (If you have trouble with organization, stick to 5 paragraph method).

1st paragraph: Hook - get your readers attention with an anecdotal story that proves your opinion, a shocking fact, or questions that get your reader understanding your position. 

2nd paragraph: Introduce your topic and clearly state your claim.

• Claim Example: Same-sex marriage should be legal/illegal because _________________________ and ________________________________________________________________. 

3rd paragraph: Discuss one reason why gay marriage should be legal or illegal and USE EVIDENCE FROM THE THE TEXT TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM!

4th paragraph: Discuss the other reason why gay marriage should be legal or illegal and USE EVIDENCE FROM THE THE TEXT TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM!

5th paragraph: Conclusion - have a strong conclusion that restates your claim in new way and calls people to act. 

January 29, 2014 - Discourse: Sharing our Thoughts about Same-Sex Marriage

I can interview and discuss the topic of same-sex marriage with my classmates using academic language.

To do this I must be able to verbally express my opinions about same-sex marriage. 

I will demonstrate this by creating a "teens react to gay-marriage" video just like the "kids react to gay marriage" video we watched. (If you are not familiar with the video, it can be found on yesterday's link).

Directions: Generate a list of questions about same-sex marriage. You can use the ones from the video, but I want you to include some of your own as well.  Then, record each other answering the questions.  Remember to speak intelligently and academically. Many of you pointed out how smart even the 5 and 6 year-olds sounded.  You guys are more than twice their age.  You should use the academic vocabulary that you see in the texts.  Also, try to recall information from the texts to make comparisons to prove your opinion. 

January 28, 2014 - Identifying Claim and Types of Evidence

I can read and annotate to identify the author's claim and the types of evidence the author used to support his/her opinion.

To do this I must use reading strategies to help me identify the claim and have an understanding of the five types of evidence.

I will demonstrate this by annotating and answering the questions in the article. 

Directions: Identify the claim, types of evidence and answer all questions in the article below. 

Why Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

By Ali Nowakowski

You wake up to the phone ringing at 1:00 a.m. It’s the hospital calling to tell you that your loved one was in a head on collision caused by a drunk driver. Quickly you rush to the hospital only to find out that they have gone into a coma. Panicked, you plead to see them. The nurse asks if you are a spouse or relative, “No, but we have been together for thirty-five years we are partners.” The nurse replies, “I’m sorry, but only spouses or family can see her.” Because it is illegal for homosexuals to marry in many states, lifelong couples such as this one are deprived of countless rights.

What type of evidence did the author use in the opening paragraph? __________________________________.

The issue that I am researching is the issue of same-sex marriage, in particular same-sex on the legislative level and how it is a civil liberties issue. Meaning that I am in favor for the United States as a whole to pass the law that grants homosexuals the right to marry each other. The fundamental issue that comes up is one of equality. The writing of the constitution the Declaration of Independence says that: “all men are created equal,” but is that really the case today? The issue of gay rights has come up today and many view the gay rights movement to be similar to the civil rights movement in the sixties for African American equality. The banning of same-sex marriage is a violation of civil liberties, because it mirrors that of the civil rights movement in the 60’s, religion should not determine law, and it is unconstitutional.

The legalization is inevitable for the movement mirrors that of the civil rights movement in the 1960s for African American equality. Even though in 1948 the thought of interracial marriage was unthinkable, that same year the Perez vs. Sharp case made legalized interracial marriage in California. Even though California’s voters may have not been ready for interracial marriage the courts recognized that the banning of gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution. It took nearly twenty years for the U.S. Supreme Court to follow suit, legalizing interracial marriage in 1967. Powell relates the Perez vs. Sharp case to the recent Perry vs. Schwarzenegger case. Much like back in 1948, merely because the voters do not agree with the idea of same-sex marriage does not mean that the motion cannot go through. Powell further explains that while same-sex marriage may become legal in the state of California it may take many years for it to be recognized by the United States as a whole. However, from recent polls taken by major networks such as ABC, CNN, and CBS, the legalization of gay marriage has an average of a 54 percent approval rating. What is the most interesting is that while these percentages maybe only halfway there, it took society till 1991 for 46 percent of voters to approve of interracial couples. It is quite possible that this shift in acceptance can possibly be explained by a recent poll by CNN, finding that “49 percent of Americans said they knew someone who is gay.” (Ponder). As more Americans come into contact with more openly gays this percentage will increase greatly.

The author compares __________________________ to _____________________________ to convey that_______

____________________________________________________________________________________________.

Another reason why same-sex marriage should be legalized is that, religious beliefs only hold so much ground in the foundation of our countries law making. The most common argument for the banning of gay marriage is the religious one. The religions that primarily ban same-sex marriage are western religions. However not all religions believe in the concept of banning the marriage between two individuals. Interestingly enough Buddhist literature viewed all marriage as a choice between the two individuals involved. One model of marriage argues that committed partnerships on a sexual level (whether heterosexual or homosexual) are important. They bond two individuals together creating stable households. It is these very households, which “form the foundation of a productive society.” (Encyclopedia Britannica). Another perspective is that “the devaluation of same-sex intimacy is immoral because it constitutes irrational discrimination, thereby damaging the community.” The Republican Party is so closely tied to the Christianity that it has become nearly impossible to separate the two. Their crusade on integrating the word of god into our country’s law books is undeniable and they have made it gay marriage their prime target. However what Republican’s should really be campaigning against is divorce and adultery. While a same-sex marriage causes no harm to those around them divorce and adultery can have devastating effects on those around them. It is in the Republican parties best interest to legalize gay marriage for they would recruit a lot more voters if they were to lighten up on the issue and focus on more pressing ones. One of the main arguments against gay marriage is that it somehow destabilizes heterosexual marriage. In an interview by campaigning lawyer Elizabeth Birch, she asked the three-times-married conservative representative Bob Barr, “Which marriage are you defending? Your first, your second, or your third?” Also the argument of marriage for the purpose of procreation is becoming increasingly invalid. Many straight couples, especially older ones, marry for the deep bond that it creates between two people. The same cannot be said for so many celebrity and reality stars, who blatantly marry for the publicity.

Based on the paragraph above, I believe that the author is most likely a . . .     democrat    /  republican   (circle one)

The most important reason is that it is unconstitutional to ban same-sex marriage, because it infringes on homosexual’s right to equality. On February 7^th, 2012 the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled Prop. 8 unconstitutional. In 2008 Proposition 8 was passed, banning the marriage of same-sex couples. Judge Stephen Reinhardt said, “Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.” There is no evidence for the claims from the sponsors of Proposition 8 and that by banning same-sex marriage it would promote children’s welfare or responsible procreation. Furthermore, there was “no legal basis that would warrant the exclusion of an entire group of people from marrying merely because of tradition. The California Supreme Court found this to be true and soon the US Supreme Court will come to the same conclusion.

The banning of same-sex marriage is a violation of civil liberties. The legalization of gay marriage is inevitable, because it mirrors that of the civil rights movement in the sixties. Secondly religion should not be what determines law in country founded on religious freedom. Finally the banning of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, because it is a direct violation equal rights granted by the U.S. Constitution. As quoted by a dear friend of mine, Randy Jimenez “God it frustrates me when I see the protesters on the streets with their “GOD Hates Fags” signs. I believe that God made gays for a reason and that is to make people more tolerant of each other and to learn empathy. The love between a man and a man (woman and woman) is no less real than between a man and a woman. It’s a lot like saying because I’m Pilipino I can’t marry a white person. Just because we look different does not mean one of us is less than the other. It’s that way for gay marriage, just because it may not seem “traditional” doesn’t mean it’s not right. Every adult has the right to live their life the way they see fit.

Post-Reading Questions:

1.      What is the author’s claim?

2.      What types of evidence does the author use to support her claim? (5 types)

3.      Which argument did you find most effective? Why?

4.      Which argument did you find least effective? Why?

Multiple Choice: 

            The author of this article would most likely agree with which of the following statements?

A.     Same-sex marriage ruins the sacredness of marriage

B.     Same-sex marriage is unconstitutional

C.     Same-sex marriage is similar to not allowing interracial couple to marry

D.     Same-sex marriage benefits society

January 27, 2014 - Identifying Claim and Types of Evidence - Same-Sex marriage

I can read and annotate to identify the author's claim and the types of evidence the author used to support his/her opinion.

To do this I must use reading strategies to help me identify the claim and have an understanding of the five types of evidence.

I will demonstrate this by annotating and answering the questions in the article. 

Warm-up: I've been telling you guys how relevant these social issues are to us, and I know I have probably been wasting my breath because you guys know that.  But, here is just another example of these social issues are relevant and real.  After watching the video from last night's Grammy's, write a reaction.  How did this video make you feel?  What things stood out with you or resonated with you? Lyrics? Ceremony? Acceptance? 

Directions: As always, we will be looking at both sides of the same-sex marriage debate. Evaluate the article below for its types of evidence and effectiveness. Did she make a compelling argument?

Love Isn’t Enough: 5 Reasons Why Same-Sex Marriage Will Harm Children

By Trayce Hansen, Ph.D.

Based on the title, the author most likely believes that same-sex marriage ________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________.

Proponents of same-sex marriage believe the only thing children really need is love. Based on that supposition[1], they conclude it’s just as good for children to be raised by loving parents of the same sex, as it is to be raised by loving parents of the opposite sex. Unfortunately, that basic assumption—and all that flows from it—is false. Because love isn’t enough!

A proponent of same-sex marriage believes ________________________________________________________________________.

All else being equal, children do best when raised by a married mother and father. It’s within this environment that children are most likely to be exposed to the emotional and psychological [2]experiences they need in order to thrive.

Men and women bring diversity to parenting; each makes unique contributions to the raising of children that can’t be replicated by the other. Mothers and fathers simply are not interchangeable. Two women can both be good mothers, but neither can be a good father.

So here are five reasons why it’s in the best interest of children to be raised by both a mother and a father:

First, mother-love and father-love—though equally important—are different and produce distinct parent-child attachments. Specifically, it’s the combination of the unconditional-leaning love of a mother and the conditional-leaning love of a father that’s essential to a child’s development. Either of these forms of love without the other can be problematic. Because what a child needs is the complementary balance the two types of parental love and attachment provide.

Only heterosexual parents offer children the opportunity to develop relationships with a parent of the same, as well as the opposite sex. Relationships with both sexes early in life make it easier for a child to relate to both sexes later in life. For a girl, that means she’ll better understand and appropriately interact with the world of men and be more comfortable in the world of women. And for a boy, the converse will hold true. Having a relationship with “the other”—an opposite sexed parent—also increases the likelihood that a child will be more empathetic and less narcissistic.

Secondly, children progress through predictable and necessary developmental stages. Some stages require more from a mother, while others require more from a father. For example, during infancy, babies of both sexes tend to do better in the care of their mother. Mothers are more attuned to the subtle needs of their infants and thus are more appropriately responsive. However, at some point, if a young boy is to become a competent man, he must detach from his mother and instead identify with his father. A fatherless boy doesn’t have a man with whom to identify and is more likely to have trouble forming a healthy masculine identity.

A father teaches a boy how to properly channel his aggressive and sexual drives. A mother can’t show a son how to control his impulses because she’s not a man and doesn’t have the same urges as one. A father also commands a form of respect from a boy that a mother doesn’t––a respect more likely to keep the boy in line. And those are the two primary reasons why boys without fathers are more likely to become delinquent and end up incarcerated.

Father-need is also built into the psyche of girls. There are times in a girl’s life when only a father will do. For instance, a father offers a daughter a safe, non-sexual place to experience her first male-female relationship and have her femininity affirmed. When a girl doesn’t have a father to fill that role she’s more likely to become promiscuous in a misguided attempt to satisfy her inborn hunger for male attention and validation.

Overall, fathers play a restraining role in the lives of their children. They restrain sons from acting out antisocially, and daughters from acting out sexually. When there’s no father to perform this function, dire consequences often result both for the fatherless children and for the society in which these children act out their losses.

According to the author, a child needs a mother and a father because ______________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________.

Third, boys and girls need an opposite-sexed parent to help them moderate their own gender-linked inclinations. As example, boys generally embrace reason over emotion, rules over relationships, risk-taking over caution, and standards over compassion, while girls generally embrace the reverse. An opposite-sexed parent helps a child keep his or her own natural proclivities in check by teaching—verbally and nonverbally—the worth of the opposing tendencies. That teaching not only facilitates moderation, but it also expands the child’s world—helping the child see beyond his or her own limited vantage point.

Fourth, same-sex marriage will increase sexual confusion and sexual experimentation by young people. The implicit and explicit message of same-sex marriage is that all choices are equally acceptable and desirable. So, even children from traditional homes—influenced by the all-sexual-options-are-equal message—will grow up thinking it doesn’t matter whom one relates to sexually or marries. Holding such a belief will lead some—if not many—impressionable young people to consider sexual and marital arrangements they never would have contemplated previously. And children from homosexual families, who are already more likely to experiment sexually, would do so to an even greater extent, because not only was non-traditional sexuality role-modeled by their parents, it was also approved by their society.

There is no question that human sexuality is pliant. Think of ancient Greece orRome—among many other early civilizations—where male homosexuality and bisexuality were nearly ubiquitous. This was not so because most of those men were born with a “gay gene,” rather it was because homosexuality was condoned by those societies. That which a society sanctions, it gets more of.

I agree/disagree with the author’s fourth argument because ______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________.

And fifth, if society permits same-sex marriage, it also will have to allow other types of marriage. The legal logic is simple: If prohibiting same-sex marriage is discriminatory, then disallowing polygamous marriage, polyamorous marriage, or any other marital grouping will also be deemed discriminatory. The emotional and psychological ramifications of these assorted arrangements on the developing psyches and sexuality of children would be disastrous. And what happens to the children of these alternative marriages if the union dissolves and each parent then “remarries”? Those children could end up with four fathers, or two fathers and four mothers, or, you fill in the blank.

Certainly homosexual couples can be just as loving as heterosexual couples, but children require more than love. They need the distinctive qualities and the complementary natures of a male and female parent.

The accumulated wisdom of over 2,000 years has concluded that the ideal marital and parental configuration is composed of one man and one woman. Arrogantly disregarding such time-tested wisdom, and using children as guinea pigs in a radical experiment, is risky at best, and cataclysmic at worst.

Same-sex marriage definitely isn’t in the best interest of children. And although we empathize with those homosexuals who long to be married and parent children, we mustn’t allow our compassion for them to trump our compassion for children. In a contest between the desires of some homosexuals and the needs of all children, we can’t allow the children to lose.

Post-Reading Questions:

1.      What is the author’s claim

2.      What was her strongest piece of evidence? What type of evidence was it? (facts/statistics, quotes, comparison, anecdotal, historical reference).

3.      What is the author’s weakest argument? How would you challenge it?

The strongest alternate title for this article would be . . .

a.       Kids with Same-Sex Parents

b.      The Need for a Mother and a Father

c.       Same-Sex Marriage is Wrong

d.      Same-Sex Parents Often have Gay Children

---

[1] Supposition- belief

[2] Psychological – of or relating to mental factors  

January 22-24, 2014 - Writing an Editoral

I can write an effective editorial

To do this I must know how to write a claim and support it with the different types of evidence, while also addressing the opposing view.

To demonstrate this I will draft an editorial on euthanasia.

Due by the end of class on THURSDAY

1. Annotated both articles about euthanasia/assisted suicide and answered all questions in the articles.
2. Analyzing the effectiveness of an argument (sentence frames - you can find them in last Thursday's lesson).
3. An editorial that includes all of the following:

• Hook - A sentence or sentences that paint a picture of a situation that supports your perspective.
• Example: Imagine seeing exhausted nurses sigh when they walk into your hospital room everyday. Imagine hearing your family discuss how difficult it is to pay for all your medical expenses.  Terminally ill people often feel like their life is not worth living because the people around them make them feel like a burden. 
• A claim - a sentence that clearly states your opinion about euthanasia.
• Example: Assisted suicide should be illegal because many people are influenced or coerced into believing that their life is not worth living. 

• Evidence - at least one primary and one secondary type of evidence
• Example: Quote - Ben Matlin, a life-long disabled person, asks the question "Who chooses suicide without influence?"
• Opposing viewpoint discussed - show the other side
• Example: Although oppon ents of assisted suicide claim that euthanasia could contribute to psychological complication for surviving family members, many people find that ending their loved one's pain helps them cope with their loss.

January 21, 2014 - Writing an Editorial

I can write an effective editorial

To do this I must know how to write a claim and support it with the different types of evidence, while also addressing the opposing view.

To demonstrate this I will draft an editorial on euthanasia.

Due by the end of class on THURSDAY

1. Annotated both articles about euthanasia/assisted suicide and answered all questions in the articles.
2. Analyzing the effectiveness of an argument (sentence frames - you can find them in last Thursday's lesson).
3. An editorial that includes all of the following:
• A claim - a sentence that clearly states your opinion about euthanasia
• Example: Assisted suicide should be illegal because many people are influenced or coerced into believing that their life is not worth living. 
• Evidence - at least one primary and one secondary type of evidence
• Example: Quote - Ben Matlin, a life-long disabled person, asks the question "Who chooses suicide without influence?"
• Opposing viewpoint discussed - show the other side
• Example: Although oppon ents of assisted suicide claim that euthanasia could contribute to psychological complication for surviving family members, many people find that ending their loved one's pain helps them cope with their loss. 
• Hook - A sentence or sentences that paint a picture of a situation that supports your perspective.
• Example: Imagine seeing exhausted nurses sigh when they walk into your hospital room everyday. Imagine hearing your family discuss how difficult it is to pay for all your medical expenses.  Terminally ill people often feel like their life is not worth living because the people around them make them feel like a burden. 

January 17, 2014 - Writing from Different Perspectives

Directions: After you have finished annotating both articles, answering all questions about both articles, and completing the paragraphs from yesterday, choose one scenario (below) and write a page about it. 

*All articles and supports can be found from previous days this week. 

Scenario Writing

1.       You have Lou Gehrig’s disease.  You have complete function of your brain, you can see, and you can talk, but you cannot use the rest of your body.  You are confined to a wheelchair and are in constant in pain except when you take strong, sedative pain medication that makes you feel numb.  The medication is the only thing that makes your pain tolerable.  Your family has to take care of you. That means bathe you, feed you, and even change your clothes – all of them.  They look tired and exhausted but are happy that you have your mental health – for the most part.  They want to do everything in their power to help keep you alive.  Convince them that they are doing the right thing by keeping you alive, or convince them that they need to let go. 

2.       You have Alzheimer’s disease.  You have complete function of your body, you can walk, you can talk but you cannot remember much of your life and are losing memories fast.  Pretty soon you will have forgotten almost everything you know about yourself and your family.  Currently, there is no medication for this disease.  Your family has to take care of you. And, they have to watch as you slowly forget who they are.  They want to do everything in their power to help keep you alive.  Convince them that they are doing the right thing by keeping you alive, or convince them that they need to let go.

3.       (Place loved one’s name here) has Lou Gehrig’s disease.  They have complete function of their brain, they can see, and they can talk, but they cannot use the rest of their body.  They are confined to a wheelchair and are in constant in pain except when they take strong, sedative pain medication that makes them feel numb.  The medication is the only thing that makes their pain tolerable.  You have to take care of them. That means bathe them, feed them, and even change their clothes – all of them.  You are tired and exhausted but happy that they have their mental health – for the most part.  They want you to help them end their live.  Convince them that they should continue living or explain to them why you will help them end their life.

 

4.       (Place loved one’s name here) has Alzheimer’s disease.  They have complete function of their body, they can walk and talk, but they cannot remember much of their life or much about you, and their memories are fading fast.  Currently, there is no cure or treatment. They are forgetting about the things they love, including you.  They want you to help them end their life.  Convince them that they should continue living or explain to them why you will help them end their life.

5.       Your child is severely disabled.  They cannot talk and have very little use of their brain. However, it is impossible to tell exactly how much of their brain they can actually use. The doctor tells you that they will be like this forever, and there is no cure.  They are in an institution where nurses take care of them, and the only way they can eat is through a feeding tube.  The only way you are legally allowed to end their life is by having the feeding tube removed, which would make them starve to death.  How will you handle this situation?

January 16, 2014 - Responding to Social Issues

Directions: After reading an annotating the articles about assisted suicide, complete the two paragraphs below. 

Due Tomorrow: Have both articles annotated and questions completed and the two paragraphs below finished. Tomorrow you will write from a randomly selected perspective.

PARAGRAPH 1:

In the article "____________________________," by ____________, the author makes the claim that _____________________________________.  This claim is supported through the use of a variety of types of evidence, including:  ______________________. An example of ______________ is when the author writes, "___________________________." He/she is using this evidence to make the point that __________________________.  Overall the author's argument was effective/ineffective because _________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________.

PARAGRAPH 2:

I agree/disagree with the author's claim because _________________________________________

__________________________________.  I believe that ________________________________

_____________ because __________________________________________________________.

January 15, 2014 - Identifying Claim, Types of Evidence, and Answering Questions

I can identify a claim and the five types of evidence in a non-fiction editorial to help me evaluate the effectiveness of an argument. 

To do this I must be able to notice and name the types of evidence and use strategies to help me find claim and evaluate the effectiveness of the author's argument. 

I will demonstrate this by annotating for types of evidence and answering all the questions about the article (article below).

Directions: Read/annotate for five types of evidence and follow instructions on the article.

Assisted suicide: Jack Kevorkian was just a sideshow

Op-Ed

The death-with-dignity movement is about compassion, freedom and common sense.

June 12, 2011|By Betty Rollin

In 1982, when I helped my mother die, Jack Kevorkian wasn't yet on the scene. Within a few years he was, noisily assisting terminally ill people who wanted to die.

My mother was dying of ovarian cancer, but in her view, not fast enough. She was 76, and one afternoon she put it to me: "I'm not afraid to die, but I am afraid of what this illness is doing to me. There's nothing but nausea and pain. There's no point in a slow death. I've got to end this."

I loved my mother and didn't want her to die, but because I loved her, I helped her. That is, my husband and I did research. We vaguely knew that helping someone die was illegal, but we didn't want to think about it. So, after every doctor friend refused to give us guidance — and warned us to stop doing what we were about to do — and after rejecting ideas like a gun (we're middle-class New Yorkers; where on Earth would we get a gun?), a sympathetic friend gave us the name of a doctor in Europe. With his help by telephone, we managed to find a way to help her get out of a life she no longer wanted.

What does the author want to do?  What is his problem?________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________.

Besides worrying about whether we were going to get it right, we worried about being found out. The real potential danger for my husband and me, however, came after I wrote a book about what happened; otherwise, no one would have been the wiser. But a lawyer I consulted told me that, technically, my mother took her own life without any active help from us—like handing her the pills. In addition, all the evidence against me I brought against myself (in the book) which, apparently, doesn't count. Besides, New York's district attorney seemed to be pretty busy with real criminals and left us alone. And that was the end of it.

When Kevorkian became well known, first helping people die with his "suicide machine" and later, when the courts took that away from him, with a tank full of carbon monoxide, people asked me if I would have wanted his help with my mother. I said no. He was too creepy; he seemed to enjoy himself too much. When he helped people to die, he seemed more focused on himself than the dying person. And later still, when I became involved with the death-with-dignity movement (a pro assisted suicide movement), we all couldn't help noticing that Kevorkian had no interest in joining with other people who were looking for ways to make death with dignity legal.

I slowly came to realize that what my husband and I had done was not a good answer to the problem of assisting in a death like my mother's. In the first place, it might not have worked. We were amateurs, after all, and dying is trickier than one thinks. My mother had to take the lethal medication with the greatest care and preparation. Second, it's risky psychologically to have family members help people die. Sometimes the feelings between the dying person and the family members are not loving enough to make it feel like the right thing to do. And in some cases, it might not be the right thing to do.

What are some potential problems with assisting in someone’s death? ______________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________.

But I knew there had to be some good way to help suffering people like my mother, who, shortly before she died, asked me a question that stayed in my mind: "What happens to other people who don't have you?"

I had no idea, but I know now. In 1994, the state of Oregon passed a law allowing physicians to give a lethal prescription to terminally ill, mentally competent Oregon residents. In 2008, the state of Washington passed a similar law. And — so far at least — they're the only ones. Because when attempts have been made to introduce the law in other states, like California, opponents — particularly the Roman Catholic Church — have waged powerful campaigns of disinformation. ("Your doctor will kill you," etc.)

Many people who believe the claim that their physicians will kill them confuse the Oregon and Washington laws, with all of their safeguards, with what Kevorkian did and what he went to prison for: killing a patient. No matter how altruistic his intentions may have been, that's what he did — in front of a "60 Minutes" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SJLoCGLPeM) audience no less. Almost no one in the pro assisted suicide movement — and there are several organizations now trying to make physician-assisted death available to more Americans — believe anyone should be killing anyone.

It's about the (qualified) patient ending his own life when he chooses with (qualified) help.

Reread the italicized words.  What does the author think the difference is between “killing someone” and assisted suicide? _____

______________________________________________________________________________________________________.

It's about something else too. It's about peace of mind. I saw firsthand what it means to a person to know she is no longer "trapped in life," which is how my mother put it. She felt she, again, was in control. The feeling of being in control seemed to wipe away her terror. Once she knew she would have access to the lethal medication, she became so calm that her sister, who didn't know what we were plotting, thought she was getting well.

How did the mother react to being given the option of “suicide?” __________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________

No doubt Kevorkian's patients felt as my mother did. The families of his patients defended him throughout his trials. And those of us in the death-with-dignity movement, who are trying to change the law, continue to criticize his methods but have come to feel grateful for one thing he did: bring attention to an important issue. Now that he is gone, it will, I hope, be easier to convince people that our efforts to help suffering people die is not about murder. It's about compassion, freedom and common sense.

Would the other agree with the statement this statement: Assisted suicide is a form of compassion? ________

How do you know? _____________________________________________________________________

Betty Rollin is on the board of the Death With Dignity National Center and is the author of "Last Wish."

1.      Is the article for or against euthanasia? 

2.      What is the author’s claim? Rewrite it here:

3.      Place a star next to the three biggest supports for the author’s claim.

January 14, 2014 - Identifying Claim, Types of Evidence, and Answering Questions

I can identify a claim and the five types of evidence in a non-fiction editorial to help me evaluate the effectiveness of an argument. 

To do this I must be able to notice and name the types of evidence and use strategies to help me find claim and evaluate the effectiveness of the author's argument. 

I will demonstrate this by annotating for types of evidence and answering all the questions about the article (article below).

Directions: Read/annotate for five types of evidence and follow instructions on the article.

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

Suicide by Choice? Not So Fast

By Ben Mattlin                                New York Times                          October 31, 2012

NEXT week, voters in Massachusetts will decide whether to adopt an assisted-suicide law.  I ought to support the effort, but as a lifelong disabled person, I cannot.

There are solid arguments in favor. No one will be coerced into taking a poison pill, supporters insist. The “right to die” will apply only to those with six months to live or less. Doctors will take into account the possibility of depression.

Fair enough, but I remain skeptical (unsure). There’s been little evidence of abuse so far in Oregon, Washington and Montana, the three states where physician-assisted death is already legal, but abuse — whether spousal, child or elder — is notoriously underreported, and evidence is difficult to come by. What’s more, Massachusetts registered nearly 20,000 cases of elder abuse in 2010 alone.

My problem, ultimately, is this: I’ve lived so close to death for so long that I know how thin the border between coercion (being persuaded; forced) and free choice is, how easy it is for someone to inadvertently influence you to feel devalued and hopeless — to pressure you ever so slightly but decidedly into being “reasonable,” to unburdening others, to “letting go.”

Perhaps, as advocates contend, you can’t understand why anyone would push for assisted-suicide legislation until you’ve seen a loved one suffer. But you also can’t truly conceive of the many subtle forces — invariably well meaning, kindhearted, even gentle, yet as persuasive as a tsunami — that emerge when your physical autonomy is hopelessly compromised.

I was born with a congenital neuromuscular weakness called spinal muscular atrophy. I’ve never walked or stood or had much use of my hands. Roughly half the babies who exhibit symptoms as I did don’t live past age 2. Not only did I survive, but the progression of my disease slowed dramatically when I was about 6 years old, astounding doctors. Today, at nearly 50, I’m a husband, father, journalist and author.

Yet I’m more fragile now than I was in infancy. No longer able to hold a pencil, I’m writing this with a voice-controlled computer. Every swallow of food, sometimes every breath, can become a battle. And a few years ago, when a surgical blunder put me into a coma from septic shock, the doctors seriously questioned whether it was worth trying to extend my life. My existence seemed pretty tenuous anyway, they figured. They didn’t know about my family, my career, my aspirations.

Would the author have been a good candidate for assisted suicide? ____________

Why?_______________________________________________________________________

Fortunately, they asked my wife, who knows exactly how I feel. She convinced them to proceed “full code,” as she’s learned to say, to keep me alive using any and all means necessary.

From this I learned how easy it is to be perceived as someone whose quality of life is untenable (not able to me maintained), even or perhaps especially by doctors. Indeed, I hear it from them all the time — “How have you survived so long? Wow, you must put up with a lot!” — even during routine office visits, when all I’ve asked for is an antibiotic for a sinus infection. Strangers don’t treat me this way, but doctors feel entitled to render judgments and voice their opinions. To them, I suppose, I must represent a failure of their profession, which is shortsighted. I am more than my diagnosis and my prognosis.

What do doctors think of the author?­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­____________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

This is but one of many invisible forces of coercion. Others include that certain look of exhaustion in a loved one’s eyes, or the way nurses and friends sigh in your presence while you’re zoned out in a hospital bed. All these can cast a dangerous cloud of depression upon even the most cheery of optimists, a situation clinicians might misread since, to them, it seems perfectly rational.

And in a sense, it is rational, given the dearth of alternatives. If nobody wants you at the party, why should you stay? Advocates of Death With Dignity laws who say that patients themselves should decide whether to live or die are fantasizing. Who chooses suicide in a vacuum (without influence)? We are inexorably affected by our immediate environment. The deck is stacked.

How could a “loved one’s look of exhaustion” or if “nobody wants you at the party” persuade one to pick assisted suicide? __________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

Yes, that may sound paranoid. After all, the Massachusetts proposal calls for the lethal dose to be “self-administered,” which it defines as the “patient’s act of ingesting.” You might wonder how that would apply to those who can’t feed themselves — people like me. But as I understand the legislation, there is nothing to prevent the patient from designating just about anyone to feed them the poison pill. Indeed, there is no requirement for oversight of the ingestion at all; no one has to witness how and when the lethal drug is given. Which, to my mind, leaves even more room for abuse.

To be sure, there are noble intentions behind the “assisted death” proposals, but I can’t help wondering why we’re in such a hurry to ensure the right to die before we’ve done all we can to ensure that those of us with severe, untreatable, life-threatening conditions are given the same open-hearted welcome, the same open-minded respect and the same open-ended opportunities due everyone else.

11. Is the author for or against assisted suicide?  2) Underline and label the author’s claim.  3) what are the authors best supporting statements (star them)

January 13, 2014 - Identifying Claims and Types of Evidence

I can identify a claim and types of evidence used in a non-fiction editorials.

To do this I must know the five types of evidence and be able to notice and name them. I must also be able to use strategies to help me infer or determine the author's claim.

I will demonstrate this by annotating excepts for claims and types of evidence.  (Assignment below)

TYPES OF EVIDENCE

1.       QUOTES:  direct statements from experts on a topic, a source, or someone directly related to the story or new topic.

Read the following excerpt from an argument on “stop and frisk.”  Annotate examples of where the author is using quotes as evidence:

The New York City Police Department’s use of the controversial stop-and-frisk tactic plunged 80 percent over the last few months.

In the time between July and September, officers made a little over 21,000 stops under the stop-and-frisk tactic. During the same time period in 2012, though, that number was sitting at 106,000 stops.

Not only are there fewer stops, but the Associated Press also reported that police are recovering fewer weapons, too. This year, the NYPD recovered 99 firearms and 463 knives in the third quarter. Last year, the 198 guns and over 1,000 knives were collected.

John McCarthy, an NYPD spokesman, told the AP there’s no “correct number of stops” that officers should be making.

“Ultimately, police officers make their decisions based on real-time observations from the field — and those stops are based on reasonable suspicion,” he added.

New York City is currently on track to record its lowest number of annual murders in history this year, and Donna Lieberman, the New York Civil Liberties Union head, said these numbers prove stop-and-frisk is not necessary to ensure the safety of residents.

“Even as (Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s) administration doggedly defends its stop-and-frisk program in court and in the public, these numbers are tacit recognition that it’s misguided and not necessary for the public safety,” she told the AP.

The massive drop in police stops has been revealed in the wake of an August ruling by a federal judge that declared stop-and-frisk unconstitutional for unfairly targeting minorities. The judge ordered that the policy undergo major reforms, but that ruling is on hold while the city appeals.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.       ANECDOTE:  a short account of a particular incident or event, especially of an interesting or amusing nature.

Read the following excerpt from an argument on gun control.  Annotate examples of where the author is using anecdotal evidence:

Gun-control advocates wasted no time before using the tragedy at the Century 16 theater in Aurora to highlight their big issue.  New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered a useless statement about gun violence: “It’s just gotta stop.”  CNN host Piers Morgan took to Twitter to advise, “America has got to do something about its gun laws.  More Americans will buy guns after this, to defend themselves, and so the dangerous spiral continues.”

Mr. Morgan’s comparison between violent psychopaths and responsible gun owners is shameful and misplaced.  The contrast is well-illustrated by a recent event in Ocala, Fla., in which 71-year-old Samuel Williams broke up an armed robbery attempt at an Internet cafe using a legal, concealed handgun.  The event was vividly captured on store security cameras and became an Internet sensation.  It showed what can happen when people have the means to defend themselves and the gumption not to be victims.

There was no return fire at the theater in Aurora because apparently no one other than the shooter was armed.  While Colorado has good concealed-carry laws, Cinemark cinemas don’t allow guns on their premises.  The Cinemark massacre illustrates the ineffectiveness of this private gun-control policy.  Granted, the circumstances of the two events were different.  The cafe robbers came to steal, not slaughter.  They were teenage punks, not psychopaths.  The Batman shooter was wearing body armor, and the scene in the theater was dark and chaotic.  An armed audience member may have shot another patron by mistake.  But he may also have found his mark, and the shooting rampage could have been ended with far fewer casualties.  Those who argue that tighter gun control would have prevented this tragedy should consider the possibility that gun control made it as deadly as it was.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.       COMPARISON:  using metaphors, similies, or analogies to support a point.

Read the following excerpt from an argument on using force to discipline your kids.  Annotate examples of where the author is using comparisons used as evidence:

The relationship between small children and their parents is just like the relationship between dogs and their owners. When a dog, and likewise a small child, wants something badly and does not get it, he or she will repeatedly make demands in ways that often irritate those who take care of them. For instance, when a dog wants a walk but the owner is busy doing something else, the dog will bark and bark and bark nonstop so that the owner gets the message and the dog eventually gets a walk. Likewise, when a small child wants a toy but the parent refuses to buy, the child will repeat his of her demands nonstop by whinging, crying and yelling so the parent gets the message and the child eventually gets the toy. The worse thing in both cases is that dogs, and likewise small children, are not creatures that adults can reason with: they simply don't listen or understand. That is why dog owners are often irritated by and get angry with their dogs in just the same way that parents are often irritated by and get angry with their small children. Furthermore, dogs and likewise small children cannot really tell what is right from what is wrong. It is dog owners and parents who are morally (as well as legally) responsible for the bad behaviour of their dogs and small children, respectively, if that causes damage to the interests of other people. Finally, the worst thing that could happen to a dog, and likewise a small child, is for it to be ignored: it is better to be cruel to it than to be totally indifferent to it as if it doesn't exist. For the reasons given above, it is morally permissible for dog owners to beat their dogs if that is necessary for disciplining them. Therefore, likewise, it is morally permissible for parents to beat their small children if that is necessary for disciplining them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.       FACTS/STATISTICS:  using relevant and credible facts and/or statistics (numbers, percentages, data) to support a claim.

Read the following excerpt from an argument on the effects of legal marijuana in Colorado.  Annotate examples of where the author is using facts/statistics as evidence:

Federal drug abuse officials called out Colorado by name Wednesday in releasing a new national survey of illicit drug use among teenagers, saying marijuana legalization efforts are clearly changing youth attitudes in a dangerous way.

In 12th-graders, for example, use in the past month was 22.7 percent of respondents, little changed from 22.9 percent in 2012 or 22.6 percent in 2011. A similar flat trend held among 10th- and eighth-graders in those years.

The federal officials cited changes from 2008 to 2013 to make their point: Past-month use by 12th-graders nationally rose from 19.4 percent to 22.7 percent; among 10th-graders, use went from 13.8 percent to 18 percent.

Meanwhile, the perceived risk of using pot is near all-time lows. High school seniors who view marijuana as a risk fell to just under 40 percent this year.

More teenagers now smoke pot than smoke tobacco cigarettes, the federal officials noted.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5.       HISTORICAL/CURRENT REFERENCE or COMPARISON:  when a writer compares someone or something from the past or present to emphasize the negative or positive aspects of their argument.

Read the following excerpts and annotate examples of where the author is using historical/current references or comparisons as evidence:

a.       "There is a great deal of parallel," Johnson told AFP, between the young Martin Luther King Jr. going to divinity school -- preachers being strong voices of the civil rights struggle – and Nelson Mandela opting for law school, "preparing himself to be a leader and understanding the law he wanted to fight."  Upon his release from prison, Mandela embraced the non-violent tenets of King and India's Mahatma Gandhi, while recognising the value of youth in pursuing change. 

b.      The Aurora mass murder and similar tragedies prove that super villains exist, but there is no real-life Batman who will swoop to the rescue with a fancy gadget and ensure a happy ending.  In a culture that increasingly glorifies violence, citizens — more than ever — need to have the means to exercise their right to self defense.