Eng 112-N02B - Blog Post #1

I read an article from the Washington Post titled “Why punish ex-offenders with a voting ban?”  The article was written by Charles W. Colson.  The author is against the current process that ex-offenders must go through to get their voting rights restored.  Ex-inmates who have served their sentence, proved themselves to be trustworthy, and are working to get their lives back on track are prohibited from voting.  This is one way that society is holding them back from a return to a “normal” life.  This is a topic that is currently being discussed with in the presidential campaign.  Mr. Colson is arguing his position on the subject throughout the article.  The purpose of the article is to try to encourage the general public, especially those who oppose the restoration of rights to criminals, to understand an ex-inmate’s point of view and how this one restriction can hold them back from feeling as though they are a regular member of society.  The article is meant to convince the reader that a person should not be punished for the rest of their life because of a mistake they made, especially when the person has served their sentence and proven himself to be responsible.  Mr. Colson has a passionate stance on this subject.  This is evident from his description of his own personal experience.  He served less than a year in a federal prison and his voting rights were not restored until 30 years later.  He feels that society should help ex-inmates return to a normal life and welcome them back to civilization rather than hold them back and continuously punish them for crimes they have already served time for.  The beginning of the article introduces the author and provides a glimpse of his background.  He is the founder of the nation’s largest outreach program for prisoners and their families.  He was also convicted of an offense related to the Watergate scandal and served time in federal prison.  The beginning of the article did get my attention and suggested that what I was about to read was a subject that was very personal to the author.  The end of the article was well written.  It stated that if we want ex-offenders to become contributing members to society, we must help them, rather than hold them back.  Also, the opposition of the restoration of a criminal’s rights is a topic that is currently being used by politicians to make a political gain, but does not serve the common good.  Overall, I feel the author made a strong argument for his position.