Public School Prayer Throughout public schools in the United States, there is a growing concern over whether students should be allowed to pray in school. In “Should Students Be Allowed to Pray in School” Michael Cantrell he states each individual school should be able to decide if prayer is allowed. Many times throughout the article, the author uses fallacies such as poisoning the well, hypothesis contrary, straw man and hasty generalizations to argue his point incorrectly. Although the author attempts to shed light on this highly debated topic, his arguments are not valid and not factual. In the first paragraph of the article the Michael Cantrell displays a logical fallacy called, a dicto simpliciter. This is when someone makes a general statement that may not pertain to everyone involved. Cantrell states, “It seems the idea of …show more content…
This is when the author purposely presents information in his favor to sway the reader. He does this by saying, “They have no constitutional purview for being involved in education in any capacity, and when it is involved it leads to someone’s rights getting trampled on.” He is displaying his displeasure with the government 's involvement in the education system. Cantrell is not presenting the given information fairly.
Finally, Cantrell uses Hypothesis contrary to fact one more time. He says, “If parents were uncomfortable with this decision, they could place their child in a different local school.” This is another made up scenario being used to back up his point. This is another flaw in his article.
Michael Cantrell, of “Should Students Be Allowed to Pray in School” made some valid points, but also made many errors. It is important to back up claims with facts and it is pivotal to not use logical fallacies. It is also important not to waffle back and forth. The article had a strong idea and a good topic, but it needs editing from an outside