link
What are your thoughts and opinions? Is this well-founded causation, or just a classic example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy?
Sure it's dated, but it's very interesting.
It's a faulty argument. Obviously higher abortion rates result in less crime, because young people are more likely to commit crimes, and abortion reduces the number of young people. However, if you factor in the fact that - at least in many people's minds - abortion is murder, a drop in other crime rates is insignificant when compared in regards to murder. Also, if abortion rates rose to its max, 100%, then after a certain amount of time there would be no more people. No crime, but no anything else, either. Also, putting children who would otherwise be aborted in good homes would reduce the crime rate as well.
FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: It's a faulty argument. Obviously higher abortion rates result in less crime, because young people are more likely to commit crimes, and abortion reduces the number of young people. However, if you factor in the fact that - at least in many people's minds - abortion is murder, a drop in other crime rates is insignificant when compared in regards to murder. Also, if abortion rates rose to its max, 100%, then after a certain amount of time there would be no more people. No crime, but no anything else, either. Also, putting children who would otherwise be aborted in good homes would reduce the crime rate as well.
Abortion does not considerably decrease the amount of young people as it decreases the amount of young people who will have a penchant for committing crimes in the future. For instance, it may reduce the amount of young people by .0001%, however, it will reduce the amount of young people who will commit crimes by 1%.
While I admit that his argument is potentially faulty, I must say that your argument is definitely faulty and ineffective.
FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: It's a faulty argument. Obviously higher abortion rates result in less crime, because young people are more likely to commit crimes, and abortion reduces the number of young people.
* BUZZ!! * - Wrong again
Crime has no relationship to age, but social status instead. A big number of unexpected pregnancies happen among young girls with low incomes or whose parents refuse to provide financial support after becoming pregnant. A lot of babies raised by young mothers living in poverty grow up in areas where they could either become crime victims or be tempted to get involved in criminal activities. Also parents struggling to raise a child while living under minumum wage or unenployment also feel at times forced to commit illegal acts to provide themselves and their children with financial support.
FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: It's a faulty argument. Obviously higher abortion rates result in less crime, because young people are more likely to commit crimes, and abortion reduces the number of young people.
* BUZZ!! * - Wrong again
Crime has no relationship to age, but social status instead. A big number of unexpected pregnancies happen among young girls with low incomes or whose parents refuse to provide financial support after becoming pregnant. A lot of babies raised by young mothers living in poverty grow up in areas where they could either become crime victims or be tempted to get involved in criminal activities. Also parents struggling to raise a child while living under minumum wage or unenployment also feel at times forced to commit illegal acts to provide themselves and their children with financial support.
Crime has a relationship to social status, indeed, but it also has a relationship with age. Not too many 90 year olds are going out and robbing liquor stores. Instead, it is generally 18-25 year olds committing crimes.
You also must take into account that there are many children raised by parents growing up in poverty areas where the child grows up to become a doctor, lawyer, or even a future president, therefore abortion is wrong on any level. You cannot predict someone's future by their parents or enviroment.
FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: It's a faulty argument. Obviously higher abortion rates result in less crime, because young people are more likely to commit crimes, and abortion reduces the number of young people.
* BUZZ!! * - Wrong again
Crime has no relationship to age, but social status instead. A big number of unexpected pregnancies happen among young girls with low incomes or whose parents refuse to provide financial support after becoming pregnant. A lot of babies raised by young mothers living in poverty grow up in areas where they could either become crime victims or be tempted to get involved in criminal activities. Also parents struggling to raise a child while living under minumum wage or unenployment also feel at times forced to commit illegal acts to provide themselves and their children with financial support.
Crime has a relationship to social status, indeed, but it also has a relationship with age. Not too many 90 year olds are going out and robbing liquor stores. Instead, it is generally 18-25 year olds committing crimes.
You also must take into account that there are many children raised by parents growing up in poverty areas where the child grows up to become a doctor, lawyer, or even a future president, therefore abortion is wrong on any level. You cannot predict someone's future by their parents or enviroment.