Answer:
1. His contention is that the two young men ought not be condemned to death and that the "Wild and luxurious stories were uninhibitedly distributed as though they were truth." Should not be utilized against the young men, because of their status of riches. He contends that at no other time has a minor been condemned to death in the territory of Illinois and that the media craze around the case ought not be utilized in their conviction.
2."And I think I am protected in saying, in spite of the fact that I have not analyzed every one of the records and wouldn't, I be able to think I am sheltered in saying that never has there been such a case in the territory of Illinois."
"Why need a judge to be encouraged by each contention, moderate and radical, to hang two young men notwithstanding every point of reference in Illinois and even with the advancement of the last 50—at any rate twenty-five—years?"
He utilizes convincing language to diminish the effect of the body of evidence against the young men, by calling into question the legitimate framework and the mankind of the judge just as the recorded cases in the province of Illinois.
Answer:
Congresswoman Mink uses a mix of pathos, ethos, and logos in her speech regarding “The Language of Government Act of 1995.” Mink uses pathos to appeal to the emotions and values of her audience, such as the sense of belonging and identity. She uses ethos to provide her credibility as a member of Congress who seeks to represent her constituents for whom English is a second language. Mink uses logos to provide facts, statistics, and evidence about English speakers in support of her argument.
A device that Mink relies on heavily is that of using rhetorical questions to strengthen her argument by emphasizing a point. The questions invite the audience to consider the issue at hand and allow Mink to offer her own solutions.
Explanation:
PLATO answer
it sounds sad and no the title does not make sense
