Question

SOMEONE HELP ME!!!

Read these two excerpts from “No Compromise with the Evil of Slavery” by William Lloyd Garrison. How are the writer’s arguments in the two excerpts different?


Excerpt 1
I am a believer in that portion of the Declaration of American Independence in which it is set forth, as among self-evident truths, "that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Hence, I am an abolitionist. Hence, I cannot but regard oppression in every form and most of all, that which turns a man into a thing with indignation and abhorrence.


Excerpt 2
Convince me that one man may rightfully make another man his slave, and I will no longer subscribe to the Declaration of Independence. Convince me that liberty is not the inalienable birthright of every human being, of whatever complexion or clime, and I will give that instrument to the consuming fire. I do not know how to espouse freedom and slavery together. I do not know how to worship God and Mammon at the same time. If other men choose to go upon all fours, I choose to stand erect, as God designed every man to stand. If, practically falsifying its heaven-attested principles, this nation denounces me for refusing to imitate its example, then, adhering all the more tenaciously to those principles, I will not cease to rebuke it for its guilty inconsistency.

-The first excerpt refers to a historical document, while the second excerpt does not.
-The first excerpt presents facts, while the second excerpt contains opinions.
-The first excerpt makes a logical appeal, while the second excerpt makes an emotional appeal.
-The first excerpt presents opinions, while the second excerpt makes a logical appeal.

Answer 1

I believe its either the first or third option but I'm leaning more towards the third option:
The first excerpt makes a logical appeal, while the second excerpt makes an emotional appeal.

Answer 2

Answer: The right answer is the C) The first excerpt makes a logical appeal, while the second excerpt makes an emotional appeal.

Explanation: Just to elaborate a little on the answer, it can be added that in the first excerpt the author is using a very forceful piece of evidence - a passage from the Declaration of Independence - to support his claim and convince his audience to do the same. However, in the second excerpt he is trying to get an emotional reaction from his readers by addressing them very passionately, boldly and persuasively. He is willing to reject the Declaration of Independence and to burn it, and he goes as far as to refer to slave owners as beasts or animals - those "other men" that "choose to go upon all fours." Furthermore, he is also willing to accuse "this nation" (and those are many people) of falsifying God's principles if they denounce him for following His example, and that must have been a very grave accusation at that time when he penned this terrific speech (1854).