For the final assignment of English 103, students were asked to write a mediation paper. We were supposed to choose an issue that had two opposing points of view, two distinct sides, etc., and to “resolve the conflict.” The assignment asked us to cover both sides of the issue separately, preferably in an unbiased manner, and to bring the two issues together through mediation.
I struggled quite a bit in choosing a topic about which I felt comfortable enough to write. There are so many “conflicts” one could write about in today’s society, but I did not feel I could do any of them justice. With each topic, I was experiencing one of two problems: I had either already chosen a side on the issue and felt that I could not cover the opposing side on a matter of principle, or I was fearful of offending someone in the way in which I covered a specific subject. I had already written a paper earlier in the year on the smoking ban that had two fairly distinct sides. The thought occurred to me to possibly take that same issue and expound upon it, developing each viewpoint further and mediating between the two opposing sides. That seemed fairly safe, pretty tame, and rather reasonable. We were asked to choose a different topic from any previous papers we had written, however. Our instructors wanted us to "broaden our horizons," if you will. I knew that was going to be fun.
I finally settled on the controversial issue of abortion. I had considered this topic for my previous paper, but had decided against it because I did not feel that I could adequately cover the issue in the four to five page limit we were given. With this assignment, however, we were told to write a minimum of six pages. That number sounded feasible and more realistic. I was still very hesitant, however. Abortion is an issue I feel quite strongly about. It is an issue that I have discussed with friends, family, classmates, and coworkers. It is an issue that I have always wanted to write about, but I had never sat down and worked on formulating a strategic argument tailored to a specific audience. That was quite a challenge. It is easy to feel strongly about something. The problem is that you can feel strongly about an issue, and still do an insufficient job of creating a strong argument on paper.
Another problem is that while I knew the assignment asked for us to cover both sides of the issue, I had not given much thought to exactly how I was going to go about doing that. How do you write – in an unbiased manner – about an issue with which you are terribly biased? That is the question I had to answer for myself as I began the arduous task of researching for and planning a paper in which I had to argue not only for my side of an issue, but for the viewpoint that opposed my own, and then had to bring the two sides together. As I sat in the library, I had no trouble typing in the search keywords “Pro-Life” or “anti-abortion.” When it came to “Pro-Choice” or “supporting abortion,” however, I was having a little more trouble. I felt as though I was going against all that I stood for just to hit “enter.”
Writing the paper was not any easier. I zipped through the Pro-Life portion of my paper without any major dilemmas. I already knew all of the anti-abortion arguments by heart, and I only needed my resources as support for my “right” viewpoint. My sentences were well-informed, confident, and cohesive. As I began the “Pro-Choice” section, however, I stumbled. I found myself spilling over several documents presented by Pro-Choice America and reading through various testimonies and figures presented by numerous Pro-Choice supporters. I was trying to formulate an argument for a belief that I did not hold, and I could not read any supporting evidence without critiquing it, without immediately coming up with information to refute the claim I was reading. I also found that each sentence I wrote began with “they think,” “they believe,” “they argue.” While I was typing the quotes, my overall work was very biased and indicative of the side I supported. I knew the revision process was going to be difficult.
After completing my paper, I felt great relief at just being done; but I knew deep down that I was nowhere near being done. I knew that I was going to have to go through my paper and tie it together. As it was, it consisted of a strong, cohesive, and confident Pro-Life argument. The Pro-Choice section of my paper, however, was weak, timid, sporadic, and – if you can imagine this – as if I was be forced to write it. It sounded as if I was throwing it in there just to say it was there, and as if I was ashamed of it. After revisions, I would say that I did a fairly even job of covering both sides of the controversial debate surrounding abortion. I discussed merits and falsehoods in both cases, and I did my best not to favor one side over the other in the mediation portion of my paper. I am not claiming that my paper is anywhere near perfect. In fact, it is far from it. You can probably still read through it and tell that I am a Pro-Life supporter, but I will admit that this paper did “broaden my horizons.” In being forced to read Pro-Choice literature and the testimonies of women who have had abortions, I realized just how one-sided my thinking had become. I oppose abortion for several reasons, ranging from logical to emotional. It goes against my religious beliefs, and it bothers me personally.
After writing this paper, however, I realized how quick I was to vilify any woman who had aborted her child, how disappointed I was in people who supported abortion, and how quick I was to pass judgment. This paper helped show me the error of my ways. I feel that while I am still whole-heartedly Pro-Life, I am more sympathetic, more informed, and better equipped to have a little healthy debate and respectful conversation with a Pro-Choice supporter.
No comments:
Post a Comment