Another bill I’d like to see passed is the one on “sin taxes.” Anyone who cares will want higher taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, particularly cigarettes. Cigarettes kill. Two of my best friends are dead prematurely because they smoked. So I feel sorry for tobacco farmers if they lose income, but being poor is better than being dead.
The article above was retrieved from: http://opinion.inquirer.net/33355/bills-to-pass
The article talks about the bills that should have been passed, according to the writer’s point of view. However, in his reason for the bill regarding higher taxes on tobacco, smoke, and alcohol, he committed a fallacy: Ad Misericordiam.
The basis for his reason was because two of his best friends have died because of smoking, and due to this happenings in his life, he wants cigarettes to have higher taxes, which would affect the livelihoods of the tobacco farmers. His reason is based on an appeal to emotion: that his two best friends died due to smoking, and he obviously did not feel good about it, thus leading him to write about the the “push” for the bill to be passed.
According to him, “being poor is better than being dead”. Just because his two best friends died, does not mean that the bill should be pushed. After all, the government has warned the people that smoking kills. Ultimately, it will be up to the people if they decide to continue smoking or not. It all falls into the decision-making of the people involved, and emotions are not a good basis/reason to support your argument— this leads to one committing the Ad Misericordiam fallacy.