Tres Questions

1. As the president of my high school’s gay straight alliance I received a lot of criticism from my peers. I did my best to remain calm, and to not give people the reactions that they were looking for when they teased and tormented my group of “faggots”. There was one instance when one man just took things too far, personally attacking me for working with these students. We stood yelling at each other in the hallway outside my Spanish room, both of us reaching unimaginable levels of frustration. We were having a conflict on level four, conflicting local values. He believed that the students, with whom I confidentially worked, were sinners on the deepest level, while I believe that they are decent human beings that deserve the same rights as anyone else. We were unable to resolve our argument because there was no way for me to convince him that his religious beliefs are wrong.
2. Savio draws on analogies of other instances in which human rights are denied. In Brave New World people are denied even the most basic rights, such as love and passion. Comparing this to the conditions at your university would make quite the statement. As a University official I would want to take into consideration the argument being presented, and work to resolve the issue at hand.
3. Obama’s emphasis on the stases of cause helps readers identify with his reasoning. If readers can understand why he feels such a deep loyalty to Jeremiah Wright, they can relate and forgive him. Understanding the history of racial tension pushes Savio, and Wells-Barnett’s arguments, by helping the reader come to terms with the terrible elements of the past. Describing the emotional elements creates audience construction, by unifying everyone behind one dreadful happenings of our nation’s history.