“The degree of one’s emotions varies inversely with one’s knowledge of the facts.” – Bertrand Russell
Part of what convinces me of my convictions is the rationality associated with them. When one can set out the facts, and, outside the spectrum of emotions, come to a conclusion, that is where one finds the truth. There are certainly times when the influence of our heart can be relevant, but when the emotional overtakes the logical, we often lose sight of the truth. Worse than one who loses sight of his own understanding of the truth is one whose emotional influence leads others astray as well. It is a reckless behavior that has been taken up by the left. However, reckless must not be associated with wild and untamed, because this tactic is used very deliberately.
Generally speaking, when someone is losing an argument of facts, and logic, they turn to emotion to turn the tide. Emotional arguments can have an intoxicating effect on otherwise reasonable people, warping their perspective. When one presents a particularly emotional argument, the observer can be moved to feel guilty about their position, even if it is right, and logical. For example, I am pro-capital punishment. If someone who was anti-capital punishment were arguing with me, they might bring up the fact that innocent men have been executed before due to poor judgments or false evidence. This argument is designed to make me feel guilty about my position. The goal of an emotional argument is to cloud an opponent’s logical systems. Rather than feeling bad, however, I would argue that the solution to the problem they presented is not to eradicate capital punishment, but to review, and modernize the process by which criminals are convicted, making sure that only the truly guilty–beyond a reasonable doubt–are being executed.
That’s just one example of emotional argumentation. The left uses this type of argumentation to advocate amnesty. According to Breitbart, Republican, and anti-amnesty advocate, Steve King was approached by an illegal woman, who tried to create a scene:
“Erika Andiola, a DREAM activist, showed her DACA papers to King and asked him if he wanted to rip them up – since he voted against the program before heading back to Iowa.
‘This is not what I do,’ King replied, according to the report.
Andiola explained that she was brought to America by her mother who was denied legal access to the United States.
‘And so it’s OK then to violate the law?…I’m really sorry that you come from a lawless country…I hope that you can have a happy life. But please, do not erode the rule of law in America.'”
Despite the woman’s attempts, King remained calm, convicted, and unfazed, because his position is based in logic, and reason. This is what the left does, they try to create scenes, and convince Americans of their beliefs through emotional means. But when one removes the emotions from the situation, and examines the facts, the conclusion is clear. Laws are being broken, dangerous criminals are entering the country, low-skill illegals are draining our resources, and taking American jobs in an already slack economy.
Conservatives are often accused of lacking compassion, but that could not be further from the truth. In this instance, Conservatives’ compassion is directed toward the American people. Conservatives want a better life for struggling Americans, and turning a blind eye to illegal immigration is not only damaging to the economy–which is damaging to Americans–it is dangerous, in terms of national security. Conservatives are not uncaring, they are not unaware of the hardships of many illegal immigrants, but their focus is on protecting our citizens, and making sure that our country’s laws, and sovereignty are secure. Without law, we have nothing.
Do not mistake emotional arguments for factual and logical arguments. They are not the same, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Always reach for what’s beneath the emotions, and you will find the truth.