1. What are two conclusions you take away from the article? Enumerate them (e. g. First and Second). Do not summarize the article - these are your ""take-aways."" 2. Does the author believe that Robertson's position (that he had not personally witnessed mistreatment of black workers and that they were happy) contributes to human suffering? Give one or two specific citations from the article to support your answer.

Question

English

Tyree Guerra

15 December, 14:47

1. What are two conclusions you take away from the article? Enumerate them (e. g. First and Second). Do not summarize the article - these are your ""take-aways."" 2. Does the author believe that Robertson's position (that he had not personally witnessed mistreatment of black workers and that they were happy) contributes to human suffering? Give one or two specific citations from the article to support your answer.

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Rivers · Answer 1

1. Two conclusion that one can take away from the article are:

First: the writer of the article, Charles M. Blow, seized the opportunity of the racially insensitive comments on the Patriach show by Phil Robertson to take and reinforce a strong position against racially insensitive, unconcerned and homophobic comments.

Second: According to the article, if Robertson were to be charged to court for uttering racially insensitive comments, it is possible for him to argue ignorance of the historical resonance and logical improbability of his comments. Charles thinks that, regardless, that is not a reasonable excuse to makes such comments especially given his age and the probability that he should have understood the import of his statements.

2. I do believe that the authors posits clearly that Robertson's attitude towards blacks contributes to human suffering. Take for instance him this excerpt from the third paragraph of his article:

"Robertson's interview reads as a commentary almost without malice, imbued with a matter-of-fact, this-is-just-the-way-I-see-it kind of Southern folksiness. To me, that is part of the problem. You don't have to operate with a malicious spirit to do tremendous harm. Insensitivity and ignorance are sufficient. In fact, intolerance that is disarming is the most dangerous kind."

Another section of the article that supports this position is drawn from the eight paragraph: "Robertson is 67 years old, born into the Jim Crow South. Only a man blind and naïve to the suffering of others could have existed there and not recognized that there was a rampant culture of violence against blacks, with incidents and signs large and small, at every turn, on full display."

Cheers!