The article by Charles Camosy titled “Is the pro-choice position for infanticide ‘madness’?” discusses the subject of giving women the option to choose whether to have an abortion or not (Camosy, 2013). According to the author, the pro-choice position is used by pro-lifers to defend their position and thereby arguing that those who engage in pro-choice can be described as people who participate in killing infants and are thus mad.
The main subject that the author touches on is the issue of pro-lifers using a different approach to justify the fact that pro-choice is a form of inexcusable death. The author highlights how pro-lifers are psychologically manipulating those who support abortion to think that they are mad. The main idea, therefore, is that the argument is presented in a psychological perspective.
It is thus clear that the author focuses on the great subject of persuasion and way in which people are playing with others psychology to make them look bad. The pro-lifers are thus presented to be manipulative and are taking advantage of psychology backgrounds to defend their position by arguing that their opponents are mad.
From the article, it is clear that the message is on using psychology to manipulate opponents. In fact, another author, by Jocalyn Clark follows suit in the use of negative statements to justify pro-life by asserting that pro-lifers are committing peaceful deaths (Clark, 2016). It is a manipulative way of making pro-choice doctors look bad when in reality it is just their position.
Overall, the article is educative and presents a new way of defending an idea or position by presenting an opponent in a negative manner. It is a weak technique that fails to focus on the facts but intends to persuade through emotion.
References
Camosy, C. (2013). Is the pro-choice position for infanticide “ madness ” ? Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(5), 301–302. http://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100814
Clark, J. (2016). Profi le Ellen Wiebe : pro-choice doctor providing peaceful deaths. The Lancet, 388(10050), 1151. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31605-1
