1.

The main point and assertions are clear since the statement avoided nonspecific words such as
society and people as a substitute for the subject. Examples and justifications are also present,
making the audience comprehend the article more. 

One of the assertions is - “This is not, and should not be, a debate about religious beliefs, personal
anecdotes, or ideological views.”
The main point - “They (Lawmakers) would simply be ensuring Argentina complies with its international
obligations and that no one is forced to suffer needlessly, especially among Argentina’s most vulnerable.”
2. These sources of evidence are reliable and slightly convincing, but adding more scholarly
journals or articles from reliable sites such as google scholar would make them sufficient and
more believable. Though, the statistics presented make it strengthened.
3. Most inferences are logical. The part about religious beliefs could be supported with evidence and
explanations to have a background idea before writing it immediately at the conclusion.
4. The other side of the argument is presented. Legalization of abortion could violate human rights
to live and can contribute to health issues.
5. Languages and word choice are appropriate to the audience, which is the Argentinian women (not
necessarily since some information is also applicable to all females) and the Lawmakers. There is
no foul language, but the article has sensitive words for children. (rape)
1. Is the main point clear? Are the assertions clear? Cite the main point and assertions and then
comment on their clarity.
The main point wasn't firm since it did not specifically state and execute the author's stand,
making the readers confused.
The assertions are clear since the statement avoided nonspecific words such as society and
people as a substitute for the subject. Examples and justifications are also present, making the
audience comprehend the article efficiently.
One of the assertions is “This is not, and should not be, a debate about religious beliefs,
personal anecdotes, or ideological views.”
2. What evidence is presented? Are the sources of the evidence reliable? Is the evidence
convincing and sufficient? Justify your answers.
All evidence were presented through linking the words with its references. These sources are
reliable and slightly convincing, but adding more scholarly journals or articles from reliable sites
such as google scholar would make them sufficient and more believable. Though, the statistics
presented make it strengthened.
3. Are the inferences based on the evidence logical? Are there any errors in logic?
Most inferences are logical. The part about religious beliefs could be supported with evidence
and explanations to have a background idea before writing it immediately at the conclusion.
4. Is the other side of the issue presented? What would be the other side of the argument?
The other side of the argument is presented “Legalization of abortion could violate human rights
to live and can contribute to health issues.”
5. Is the language, as well as word choice, suited for the target audience? Identify first the
intended audience and comment on the appropriateness of the language used.
Languages and word choice are appropriate to the audience, which is the Argentinian women
(not necessarily since some information is also applicable to all females) and the Lawmakers.
There is no foul language, but the author did not give any trigger warnings nor did not censor
sensitive words such as "r*pe" that may affect some readers.