Friday, March 8, 2019
WRL media coursework, Amnesty
In June 2007 mercy international, an organisation who make water traditionally partnered the Catholic Church, changed at that place policy on abortion after in that respect research in Dafur. They looked into enchant and how in numerous countries it is being use as a weapon of war and once a folk has defeated another tribe the women of the atomic number 18a would be raped as a signal of victory. After these findings oblivion who previously neutral on abortion has stated that it supports abortion in certain circumstances such(prenominal)(prenominal) as rape, incest and as a weapon of war.Over the years some(prenominal) the Catholic Church and pardon urinate worked together on dismission political prisoners and highlighting human rights. However since amnesty changed its policy on abortion against in that locations they have advised all Catholics to quit at that place social status to amnesty. In my coursework Ill be looking at two articles on in that location views on the preceding and be comparing and contrasting between them. The front article is from the withstander, a report which is well kn bear for its liberal view and belief of free will.It believes the Catholic Church is wrong for banning amnesty and some(prenominal) starts and finishes ridiculing the Catholics view as nonsensical. They also mention how out of the 1/4 million catholic members of amnesty only 222 quit and how or so of these where from the clergy who whitethorn of lost there jobs if they had refused. It also mocks the catholic mentioning how 105 Catholics have even increased there donations. To show what side the guardian is actually on it dialogue about how 2000 Catholic schools will suffer from not being able to use amnestys t individuallyings.The nett part of the article talks about amnesties policies and talks about there research in Darfur and the pop Republic of the Congo, overall the guardian makes a in truth convincing pipeline which undermines the Cath olics view. Meanwhile the Telegraph is a much more traditional paper and believes in the Catholic Church, however does not rebuff amnesty as well much. The telecommunicate relies on statistics to present a illustration and uses yields such as 2000 secondary schools and 5000 Catholic parishes and if the telegraph were to present a case where the numbers arent available they would probably struggle.The article contradicts the guardian by claiming the number of Catholics leaving amnesty as exodus. However un identical the guardian admits how the splitting has made a lot of Catholics look at there faith. The article also does not insult the Catholics decision as the telegraph has a large catholic postdateing which it would not want to upset. I believe each of the articles support one side, the guardian supports amnesty and the telegraph supports the Catholic Churchs view.After reading both(prenominal) articles I believe the guardian puts up a much more convincing and uses the inf ormation guardedly to make me believe it is a pointless decision for the Catholics to turn there posteriors on amnesty and will do them no practiced. I personally feel neutral about abortion, I believe that abortion is a serious decision and unnecessary abortion is wrong. However practiced like amnesty I believe abortion is ok if caused by rape or it may affect the womens life.This just goes to show maybe the Catholics blow is unfounded and that there is no point in splitting of amnesty and the Catholics, as I am a catholic and like many share these views. What I have learnt from this coursework is how influential the media fucking be and how they can pick up a subject field, twist it, put people against each other and make a profit from it. Newspapers can create im chasteity figures and change the publics view of a character for example the way the tabloids have changed the way people think of Heather McCartney during her divorce.However everybody has there own opinions on what the Catholic Church has done and all have these opinions for divers(prenominal) reasons. Some peoples religions change there view many Catholics will back there Church and fully support there church. Others will be altered by there upbringing and many will follow what they were brought up to believe so if they were brought up to follow amnesty they are more than likely to stick with them. Newspapers change peoples views and can create a bias between sides and if the public are constantly battered with the information it is only a matter of time before the minds change.A final factor that can change peoples view is there own good and bad experiences and if someone has a bad experience with a person, group or organisation there view of them will be altered. This may not be an issue that effects everyone, however it is a very important event for Catholics or anyone associated with the Catholic Church, especially those who are members of Amnesty as it put there religion and perso nal beliefs in meshing and can cause some important personal decision to be made on there religious future.So it goes to show moral views and religious views for Catholics are not identical and issues such as this just highlight this. Finally we come to what may happen from now on and what the future paths are for the Catholic Church and amnesty. Firstly the Catholics may thin what the church has to say on amnesty and pass on reinforcement both amnesty and being a catholic and in the remainder ant feud will be dropped.Secondly the media may carry on picking up on the story and use it as a daily article, this may result in publicity incomplete side wants and the whole topic becoming out of hand and both sides being made a mock of. The final option is for both amnesty and the Catholic Church to come to a compromise and to go out there one minor difference and focus on there many similarities and soon the media will get bored of the whole topic and move onto a more interesting n ews. As for both amnesty and the catholic church this is the result which suits them both but what happens from here is belt down to them and the media.