Progymnasmata IV: Common-Place

Prologue: Since acts of terrorism impede upon the right to live by individuals harmed in said acts, and since there are laws in place by nations rendering acts of such violence and terrorism illegal and punishable by law, those who commit acts of terrorism must be condemned.

Contrary: Terrorism is assumed as an act of violence and hatred from one group or individual to another group or individuals, usually with conflicting beliefs and ideologies. Condemnation of terrorists is not a new practice. The intentions and establishment behind condemning terrorists is designed solely to protect the lives of the innocent bystanders who are most affected by this violence.

Exposition: However, acts of terrorism are committed by people who clearly exhibit no regard for laws of morality and the preservation of life. The hatred that resides within those who commit acts of terrorism is absolutely condemnable because they blatantly disregard the laws put in place that are meant to establish order and preserve life. The wrongful act is found solely in the destruction of peace and social order. The lives lost from acts of terrorism is the clear demonstration of evil put forth by terrorists.

Comparison: Existance of hate within individuals or groups is an unfortunate crime against humanity in itself, but when the internal hatred manifests into outward hatred and acts of terrorism, innocent people suffer unnecessarily.

Intention: When all is said and done, a crime is a crime. However, the difference in severity of crime as well as punishment lies within the intent. Lesser crimes involving death such as manslaughter are not always voluntarily. However, the intent behind committing acts of terrorism is to instill fear and gain a sense of power, locally and globally. Those who commit acts of terrorism do so with every intent of destroying an economy, a group, and in the instance of 9/11, destroying a nation's sense of security. The extensive amount of planning that went into the events that took place on 9/11 proves a complete disregard for the preservation of life and laws of morality.

Digression: Civil disobedience has proven to be an effective way of breaking the law for a cause that benefits humanity. But any group who willingly plans and participates in the destruction of the target of terror is not utilizing the means available for improvement or attention to their cause. These people clearly could not have had positive results from appropriately addressing an issue and must not have lived a satisfactory life.

Rejection of Pity: It is all too simple to feel pity for the poor souls who were never given a chance to succeed as the rest of society has. It is even easier to find empathy within ourselves to feel compassion for those who were not afforded the same opportunities that we have and in a frenzied fit of frustration concluded that terrorism is the only option. However, the consequences for dismissing these acts of terror will only perpetuate the disregard for laws of morality and humanity.

Legality: As a society we understand that those who follow the rules are rewarded in the long run, and it is likewise true that those who do not follow the rules should be punished in the end.

Justice: It is therefore just for those who commit acts of terrorism to be condemned in a court with appropriate punishment.

Advantage: Condemnation for those who commit acts of terrorism is advantageous because it demonstrates to people who find themselves in similar situations that there is no justification for committing acts of terrorism and the rammifications of doing so comes with dire consequences.

Possibility: Though it is currently difficult to apprehend every individual who is affiliated with groups reigning terror on our nation, the possibility of punishment in court is strong because the power within the judicial system is more than sufficient to administer ample punishment.