A mother in our congregation passed on an article titled, "Reflections on Pro-Life Protest Rhetoric" by doctoral candidate John F. Brick published yesterday on the website of the Roman Catholic publication, Crisis Magazine. She explained, "...I would be interested in thoughts on this Catholic's article advocating a newer rhetoric in the pro-life movement that doesn't include shock and outrage signs. We had a discussion yesterday at PP about being effective as protestors and I think it's an issue that we need to continue to discuss." For what it's worth, here are my thoughts.
I teach first-year rhetoric and composition to freshmen at a fairly large university squarely in the center of the American Midwest. In September, as part of the introductory unit, we cover some basic rhetorical concepts, including the famous “triangle” of rhetorical appeals: logos, ethos, and pathos. Logos, I explain, is the appeal to reason: does the argument make sound logical sense? Ethos sounds like ethic and it’s a short jump from there to credibility: do the elements of composition suggest a levelheaded, trustworthy arguer? Pathos, the emotional appeal, is the easiest for my students to remember and deploy in their own writing. But, I caution them, it’s also the weakest of the three. Without the other two appeals, emotional rhetoric will do an argument more harm than good.
Thing about ethos is that perceived level-headedness and trustworthiness shift according to the wickedness and spiritual bondage of the audience. According to how jaded or "given over" they are. Who would have sounded trustworthy to the people of the Third Reich after they had invaded their neighbors and butchered millions of minorities, lives-not-worth-living, and Jews from among their own countrymen?
Precious few, and likely only those who tried the fool's errand of arguing against the slaughter by appealing to the glory of the Aryan race and the fatherland.
Try out perfectly logical analogies between abortion and Roe v. Wade and slavery and Dred Scott. People will look at you as if you’ve grown a third eye and turn away from you. In our decadent day, about the only thing that “works,” as the author defines it—particularly in the logos and ethos spheres—are appeals to self-love and comfort, and maybe choice. So yes, you can, for instance, speak of the absence of “choice” in China, and how none of the feminists in our country seem to be upset about it. But even among Christians, the argument falls to the ground with a thud. Pat Robertson famously said that if we lived in a country with a population of a billion, we might not be so quick to judge...