Monday, February 20, 2012

Joyce Arthur Gets Smacked Down, Again [Scott]

This time by Mario Conseco.

Finally, Ms. Arthur is confused—and this is something that happens many times with lobbyists—when awkwardly attempting to establish a correlation between breadth and incidence. Because late-term abortions rarely happen, she seems to suggest, we do not need a law. This is as preposterous as saying that there should be no law on same-sex marriage, because only 0.02 per cent of Canadians have chosen to wed their gay or lesbian partners....

Before putting our trust in Ms. Arthur and her “analysis”, we must consider her selective quoting of polling data. She has done it before, with surveys conducted by the same company she now attempts to bash. If the proportion of Canadians who wanted no changes to abortion were higher, Ms. Arthur would not be questioning this poll’s findings.


HT: Jivin J

1 comment:

  1. Read an article by Ms. Arthur a few years ago, titled "Fetal Focus Fallacy." The thesis was: "anti-choicers" wish to make the fetus the focus of the abortion debate, but this is a fallacy. Throughout the entire article she never once stipulates what is logically fallacious about making the fetus the focus of the abortion debate.

    ReplyDelete

All comments are moderated. We reject all comments containing obscenity. We reserve the right to reject any and all comments that are considered inappropriate or off-topic without explanation.

News on the Matter

Loading...