Abortion and the just-world fallacy, again
Below is something I wrote in 2013:
* * *
To quote Wikipedia, “the just-world hypothesis or just-world fallacy is the cognitive bias (or assumption) that a person’s actions always bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, so that all noble actions are eventually rewarded and all evil actions are eventually punished. “
I see this cognitive bias in many of the comments to anything I post about abortion. Anti-abortion people have this bias that they believe that banning abortion (which is supposed to be evil) will bring better outcomes. But the reality, as I keep pointing out, is that abortion is effective at reducing the birthrate of poor women.
For example, according to the Guttmacher Institute “Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children)” and another “twenty-seven percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes between 100–199% of the federal poverty level.
So we see that the women most likely to have abortions are those who should be having abortions, women who have no way to support their children except by collecting welfare, and children raised by welfare moms are many times more likely to be criminals, so it’s not surprising at all that Steven D. Levitt, author of Freakonomics, found that abortion reduced crime. (And Levitt rigorously rebuts Steve Sailer who tried to argue that it didn’t.)
People who care about the future of our country should be trying to promote abortion rather than trying their damndest to stop women from obtaining them. Abortion lowers welfare payments, lowers crime, and gives single pregnant women an option that significantly increases their chance of achieving a self-supporting career and getting married in the future. Abortion would be even more effective at doing this if Christian nuts weren’t trying so hard to convince women that it’s evil.
* * *
Christians who oppose abortion should at least have the HONESTY to acknowledge that if they got their way, there’d be a big increase in welfare payments and crime. If they said “yeah, we know that will happen, but it’s a price we should pay as a nation to do the moral thing” then I’d have a little bit more respect for them.
Similarly, SJWs who believe that it’s EVIL to restrict immigration and EVIL to deport people who came into this country illegally and live here illegally, they should have the honesty to admit that those illegal immigrants suck up huge amounts government money while putting citizens out of work and lowering wages.
* * *
By the way, I would be 100% behind the idea that non-marital sex leads to unwanted pregnancies (which leads to abortion as well as problem children raised without a father who suck up government welfare payments and commit crime when they become teenagers), and both the government and the elites who control the media should take more responsibility for discouraging non-marital sex (instead of glorifying it as the media currently does and looking down upon virgins as being disgusting losers).
Unfortunately, we probably won’t get such policies from Trump, because he once mocked a participant on The Apprentice for being a virgin. Strangely, the mainstream media which loathes Trump and has taken every opportunity to attack him, never once brought this up as a negative against him.