Alien and Sedition Acts

1. What is the author arguing?

In the Alien act the author is trying to argue that  the  president  has the right to deport any resident alien considered dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States. Also the president has the power to apprehend and deport resident aliens (males fourteen and up) if their home countries were at war with the United States. While “good behaved” aliens could stay in the country if the Sate premets,

The Sedition act provided  the punishment of persons conspiring to oppose or obstruct measures of the federal government and for the punishment of some writings critical of the government. However if one can give justification for his writing to a jury and found not guilty than his off the hook.

2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

Alien act
   Logos-  I think the whole document was quite logical in a twisted way. It states that if America was at war with a hostile nation than we should have the right to detain and deport any civilian who was affiliated with that nation and that has presented a clear danger to America if not than the state can decided if the civilian can stay in the country.

·         Pathos-  The author uses pathos by describing that this “aliens” could be very dangerous to the public well-being, he  reuses words like enemies and hostile to emphasis that we should be afraid of them.

·         Ethos- The author seemed somewhat paranoid . Reading the document it felt like if we didn’t get rid of this “aliens” than it would be the end of America.

Sedition act

·         Logos-  The author uses logic by saying  “impede the operation of any law of the United States” by saying this it’s basically saying that there going against your country and everything it stands for.

·         Pathos-  They use emotional quality by saying that it is plain out wrong to insult a government official instead they should be seen as hero’s for serving their country.

·         Ethos-  The author seemed argent , they wanted government officials to be seen as hero’s or celebrities.    

3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

Both documents felt like we were taking a step back. The constitution promised freedom and equality while this documents restricted some of those rights by preventing freedom of speech, press, and the right to life.  It looked more and more like a monarchy than a democrat government, I guess in some way it showed us that we had to work harder to protect this rights.

4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

No, If you think about it these documents want against everything  the founding Father fought for. They restricted freedom and spread fear amongst the population. If this laws were still valid today it would be like living in modern day China were everything you do could be seen by the government and you couldn’t say anything about it because you would be “Criticizing” the government.  

Declaration of Independence, Continental Congress, July 1776

1. What is the author arguing?

 The authors of the declaration of independence are arguing that the colonies should separate themselves from all political ties with Britain. The article starts off by saying that “All men are created equal and there are certain unalienable rights that governments should never violate these rights include the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. This sentence alone would suggest that Britain had violated one of those rights. They later on state that if a government does not protect those rights than the people should have the right to overthrow the government. By saying this they’re giving justification for their action, basically there whole argument is that Britain didn’t up hold any of their rights it lead them to no choice than wanting independence

2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

The authors use logos by saying “That all men are created equal”. By saying that there suggesting that all men have the same rights as one another which was a huge deal during that time period because it lead the foundation for future human rights. Also by saying that it brought a sense of unity amongst the colonies by stating that it doesn’t matter if your rich or poor were all in it together. They use pathos by saying that they are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” meaning that God has given them rights that no man can take away from them. They used ethos in their reasoning and evidence they had against how England violated their rights.

3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

This document had huge significance on American history. It basically told Britain that we had enough of there abusive hold on us and we want tolerate it any further. To think that one piece of paper could have so much impact is somewhat mind boggling but it did. Basically, the Thirteen Colonies declared themselves independent of the Kingdom of Great Britain and explained their justifications for doing so. The Declaration also plays a significant role in our world today it was because of it that women were allowed to vote and have the same rights as men also it allowed many of the civil rights act to pass through because of its famous phrase that “All mean are created equal”.  

4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

I find it very convincing. The first part is an introduction that states the purpose of the document, which was to explain why the American people were declaring independence from the government of Great Britain. While the second part is a theory of what a good government should be and the third part lists the actions Britain did that violated that theory.  All in all its one of the most organized documents I have read from that time period to the point that anyone could understand it without a problem. They backed up there reason for independence with facts and there opinions of an ideal government.