Question

Easy please help! :)

Imagine how you would feel if you were a delegate at the Convention. How would you respond to Patrick Henry’s passionate words? What effect do the words have on you today?

Answer 1

Read this first: From “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!”
It is in vain sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Answer 2

Well, Charlotte, since this is supposed to be a personal reflection, I can only give you so much help. This is my advice: As you read the paragraph, try to focus on the powerful words Henry is using, and the emphasis he places on the word "peace" and what he's implying that people will do to get it. (Example, slavery.) Personally, if I were a delegate at the Virginia Convention, I'd be either motivated or angered at these passionate words. And I'd really only be angry if I were a supporter of slavery, because Henry's words are so powerful and sensible that I think only a supporter of slavery would be able to disagree with him.

Answer 3

ur the best :D thanks for all the help :)

Answer 4

anyone else wants to add something? :P

Answer 5

H would piss me off and worry me. On the one hand, his inflammatory angry rhetoric would be dangerous -- he would make it much harder to think through with cool logic the best solutions to the country's problems. He would be a reason for people to go off half-wingspaned, with dumb ideas that seemed good if you didn't think about it too hard. On the other hand, he would worry me, because I'd believe behind him there would be a substantial group of disaffected and angry supporters, and they would pose a real danger if whatever action was taken didn't please them. Angry people in large numbers are always dangerous.

I might, if I were cynical enough, think he could be useful, however. If his fiery rhetoric could be deployed to serve serious and thoughtful aims, then he could be very useful in rallying people who liked fiery rhetoric more than calm reflection to the cause.