The death penalty has been a part of our government system since the beginning. Over the years, court systems in eighteen states have made the death penalty illegal, including Iowa. For the thirty two that still have it legalized have constantly been debating about the banning of the Bible and biblical words. Winnifred Sullivan gave her information about the line between Church and State with the death penalty. Winnifred Sullivan is a Professor of Religion and Affiliate Professor of Law at Indiana University. She has wrote many books about how law in America and religious freedom go back and forth with each other. She always had an interest in religion that generates law and is regulated by law, which is why she co-wrote a book called Three Inquiries in Church and State. Her part of the book is titled Banning Bibles; Death-Qualifying a Jury. She was very soft spoken, and it was hard to hear her sometimes without a microphone on her, and with an audience of close…show more content… I was surprised by this because I thought she would give her input on whether or not the death penalty should be legalized. I think her goal for us was to learn about church and state most of the time do not go hand in hand, especially with the death penalty. Her being a Professor of Religion and Law is an example of ethos, along with the many books she has written about the topic. I think an example of logos would be when she brought up that when the Bible was used in death penalty cases, the jurors would become confused and think that the Bible is the law they should follow instead of our government’s constitution. An example of pathos from her speech would be her example of the court case, People vs. Lane, and some of the jurors thought that the death penalty was the only way for Lane to stop killing, but one juror believed that the defendant could change and become a better
