Are You a Mushroom?

So on Friday, there were some solicitors passing out little newspapers in front of the school. My friend showed me the article and I realized that these people were campaigning pro-life ideals. They were informing us the "truth" behind abortion because many people are ignorant to what it "really" is.  The issue of the article was whether abortion should be illegal or not. It gave examples supporting how abortion was wrong.  and cleared up any exceptions such as if abortions should be accepted for women who were victims of rape.  

The article first established pathos by connecting with the values of the reader.  Pro-life obviously values life of human beings over choice.  The word life has a very positive connotation, which would automatically pull in readers to agree with their position.  The article seemed kind of degrading towards the readers.  When I read, it made me feel like I was stupid for either not knowing what abortion really was or not agreeing with the authors position.  It attacked my value system, but then gave a solution to fix it.  No person wants to feel immoral or ignorant so by attacking our value system it made us want to fix ourselves and also adopt pro-life ideals. The article established logos by giving statistics about how women felt emotional holes, depression, and suicidal thoughts after aborting. The statistics also had an emotional factor, but the numbers behind it give the readers a sense of logic and feel that it is the only sensible thing to stop abortion. The article also established ethos by stating how doctors agree that abortion is murder since lie begins at contraception.  Once again this argument relies on pathos, but it is also ethos since doctors are trusted in society. 

Although all the facts given were entirely true, I believe that the article was poorly written.  It used words such as "crap" to describe the arguments behind pro-choice and it was severely one-sided. The support behind why rape victims should not have an abortion was one real-life account of a woman who felt better to keep her child.  I didn't find it supportive enough however because it was only one account and didn't take into consideration that many women have different mentalities.  Of course "abortion doesn't unrape a woman" as the article argued, but a women might not want to be reminded everyday of their rape if they were to keep the child. 

I have always been pro-choice, but for me there is a very unclear line of when it is okay and when it is not okay. The question I have is why does it have to be conditional? Even I don't understand...

Do you think I am a mushroom?