Terri Schiavo and the Appeal to Emotion

This post is going to be less about apologetics per se and more about thinking clearly. Like many of you I have been following the story of Terri Schiavo fairly closely. In fact, I watched C-SPAN for an extended period of time for the first time in my life (well...other than watching Prime Minister's Questions once or twice) to listen to people debate whether Congress should mandate that her case be reviewed.

I was struck by the poor quality of the arguments a number of the Representatives displayed, and thought that Christians who want to think clearly should take care not to fall into this trap. The most common poor argument by far was the appeal to emotion. People on both sides of the issue said things like, "I am against killing Terri Schiavo because I am a mother/father and I can't imagine having to do this to my daughter." This is all well and good, but our love for someone is not a logical reason for performing a certain act. Let's look at another example that will clear up the confusion about appeals to emotion.

I have a two sons, one two years old and the other four months. Say my two year old has taken to smacking his little brother. I think we would all agree that I should reprimand my two year old. But what if I say to you, "I just love my son so much, I can't imagine reprimanding him." Does that sound like a good reason to let his behavior continue? Of course not! By the same token, it will not do for us to advocate Terri Schiavo's survival by talking about how much we love our children. We must come up with logical reasons for these sorts of things because emotions are notoriously untrustworthy. They can be used to "justify" all sorts of things.