1.) Linda Chavez starts off her article with these six words, “Civility in public discourse is important.” She chooses to use this specific word choice in order to help the reader better understand her position in the argument of the civil public. By bluntly stating her opinion in the situation, Chavez already informs the reader how she is thinks that we could be careful with the way we act and the things we say in public.
2.) She uses the word “bellicose,” which means to be warlike or hostile in manner or temperament. Chavez has a very large use of vocabulary that only intensifies her point of the metaphors that have been disagreed about since the beginning and how they create conflict within the country.
3.) Linda is trying to persuade her audience into believing that the way we, as citizens, chose to word our opinions will change the view of others in our communities and country. She says if we can state our thoughts in a more civil manner then it will come across others in a more efficient, pleasant way.
I agree with Chavez in how she says that in the way we word our thoughts we can offend the public and it will ruin the chances of civility in our public. For example, if we went around saying the word “gay” it could offend some people of the community. We should not be offensive to others in our public; however, we should be cautious and aware of the other opinions.
4.) I believe in what Linda Chavez states about being civil in our public and how it will eventually hurt us if we do not express our minds with creativity.
