My Critique of Christian Smiths Fight for DACA
On September 23rd, 2019, Christian Smith posted an article on the Austin American Statesman. Christian's article is called My Fight to protect DACA is a personal one. His argument was a heart tugging plea that the Supreme Court should not end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Christian told his own personal story about meeting a young boy at the age of 1 years old, who grew to become one of his best friends. His friend, Mateo, is an illegal immigrant protected under the DACA program. Both Christian and Mateo are extremely worried about the repercussions that could occur not only to their friendship, but to Mateo's life, and those of the general US population if Congress decides to end the DACA program. I'd like to take a few moments to critique Christian's stance and opinion of his article.
I believe Christian's intended audience is the general US population, particularly those that are citizens and have friends or family members that are illegal. He uses warming, soulful words and phrases like "home", "not a blood-relative, but I consider him my brother", and " family" in an attempt to tug at the heartstrings of families and individuals to back his fight for keeping DACA.
Christian's article is credible since he doesn't stand to gain financially from writing it and his idea's do have merit. However, his argument needs to be a little stronger. He has a good point when he mentions how the DACA program can save billions of dollars but lacks any kind of citation or substantial real evidence to back up what he's saying. Most of his argument is telling his readers about his emotional obligation to his friend and family to keep the DACA program. Laws can't and shouldn't be passed based off of emotion only. Laws need strong substantial reasons, proof, and examples as to why they should exist. Unfortunately, his article lacks in providing any of that.
In conclusion, I do agree with Christian's argument but think that it could be stronger by bringing in logical reasons for why DACA should exist and the requirements that immigrants must meet in order to have protection under DACA. Providing more resources, citations, and evidence as to how the DACA program and illegal immigrants, benefits the US government in more than just an emotional way would enforce his argument and make his writing that much better!
I believe Christian's intended audience is the general US population, particularly those that are citizens and have friends or family members that are illegal. He uses warming, soulful words and phrases like "home", "not a blood-relative, but I consider him my brother", and " family" in an attempt to tug at the heartstrings of families and individuals to back his fight for keeping DACA.
Christian's article is credible since he doesn't stand to gain financially from writing it and his idea's do have merit. However, his argument needs to be a little stronger. He has a good point when he mentions how the DACA program can save billions of dollars but lacks any kind of citation or substantial real evidence to back up what he's saying. Most of his argument is telling his readers about his emotional obligation to his friend and family to keep the DACA program. Laws can't and shouldn't be passed based off of emotion only. Laws need strong substantial reasons, proof, and examples as to why they should exist. Unfortunately, his article lacks in providing any of that.
In conclusion, I do agree with Christian's argument but think that it could be stronger by bringing in logical reasons for why DACA should exist and the requirements that immigrants must meet in order to have protection under DACA. Providing more resources, citations, and evidence as to how the DACA program and illegal immigrants, benefits the US government in more than just an emotional way would enforce his argument and make his writing that much better!
Comments
Post a Comment