In Class: 3 Texts Tie In

How do these textes fit together?
These texts are all a bit combative. With the first text with the seminary president he starts by attacking their tactics in the ministry and how they are opening themselves up for failure. The second text of Ron Jeremy's debate validates the moral character of the people in the ministry, but seeks to cut his argument at the throat, not at the knees. Jeremy discusses the the ridiculous nature of the claims that the leader makes and does not address the situation in a passive sort of way.

How are they the same?

How are they different?
The theo. pres. goes for a different tactic in calling into question the moral character of Gross and his people. He also, in his main points does not cut directly to the point when talking about what he does not agree with. He says that Jesus wouldn't necessarily go to a sex expo, but he never says that Gross shouldn't. Most of his language is metaphorical but strong at the same time.
Jeremy's text has a lot of information that is in direct response to something previously said (as is the nature of debate) but he is also quick to respond that he agrees with a lot of what Gross says about not being available for kids and the fact that he is true to waht he preaches.

Unspoken Values and Assumptions:
Many of these arguments, especially from Gross and the Sem. Pres. talk about what Jesus would view as appropriate. The fact that this point plays such a large role in both of these agruments begs that the audience understands who they are talking about and that they attribute some sort of authority and power in the citation of the name. For those that do, it allows these specific statements to hold a lot of weight and carry meaning, but for those that don't the message could get lost. Also, the fact that participating in pornography is a "sin" is an unstated assumption in these two texts as well.

Cultural of Assertion:
The state of argument in America, as suggested by these 3 sources, relies heavily on shock value and authority. They seek to accomplish this by citing someone they each consider a relevant power in whatever argument they are trying to make. In the event that someone does not see the validity in the authority that they each cite, there is a lot of lost ground.
There is also a lot to be said on the shock value factor that each present. Each one of these interviews and debates cite something that should make any normal audience gasp. In hooking the audience's attention by this method there is an extreme emotional factor.

xxxchurch.com

I had a really hard time coming up with this topic. I wanted to do something within my major, but it was hard for me to think of a controversial event within psychology that had a lot of primary sources that were generated. While I was listening in class on Tuesday, I thought of a friend of friend and how maybe furthering with a rhetorical analysis would be fun since I have a more personal connection to this topic.

All that to say my topic is on XXXchurch and Strip Church located on the strip in Vegas. If you are a little shocked by the name, it's exactly what it sounds like. This is a previous youth minister who has left the comfort of a settled church to pursue evangelizing to anyone involved with the porn industry. Lots of media has been generated around the idea and many churches are completely disapproving of this ministry focus.

The biggest thing they do every year are the porn expos in Las Vegas and Australia. Here they hand out flyers, where shirts that say "Jesus loves porn stars," and hand out XXXchurch Bibles and Strip Church water bottles. I will be looking for things surrounding this and may even check Las Vegas newspapers to see if that was featured. I would also like to take a look at at least one backlash statement from within the church community. As it sounds so far, all the backlash from the porn community dissipated when they realized that these men were not coming at them with picket signs and screaming against their lifestyle.

I'm hoping to get some really good information and this will be tons of fun for me since I do have a personal connection to Craig Gross and his wife.

In Class: Holy Crap

I am feeling a little bit nervous about this particular project. I realize it is supposed to be over something that is interesting and relevant to me, but for the life of me I cannot come up with anything. In the last section I had a hundred ideas the second the assignment was given, but this time the idea is a bit more vague. This leaves me with so many options that it is hard for me to find one, especially one I would enjoy working on and learning about for the next 5 or 6 weeks.

I also am a little bit confused as to how this assignment, in its execution, will be much different than the paper before it. I feel as if the assignment is basically the same but that there are just bigger names attached to the concepts of what we were already doing. I realize that labeling the arguments as such should start to go away but other than that I think I may be missing something.

My biggest challenge, as I said for this upcoming assignment will be to knuckle down and just grab a topic. Once I can do that I am pretty sure that a lot of my anxiety, if not all, about this project will start to fade