Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!mit-eddie!barry
From: barry@mit-eddie.UUCP (Mikki Barry)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Correlation?
Message-ID: <3997@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Apr-85 20:23:42 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.3997
Posted: Tue Apr  9 20:23:42 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 10-Apr-85 05:15:15 EST
References: <248@dscvax2.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 19

Statistics are like the Bible, they can be used to prove ANYTHING!

How do you know abortion's legality hasn't REDUCED the number of possible
child abuse cases because those who really didnt' want to have a kid, didn't.

I am pro choice, but have a great respect for life that is living and
breathing and walking on the earth.  Surprise, right?

Statistics ALSO say that there were no valid statistics for child abuse
until 1979, AND even then, statistics weren't absolutes because so many
cases were not reported, and are still not reported.  The same is true for
spouce abuse, and rape.  Also, what is your definition of abuse?  Is it 
the same as pre 80's definition whereby hitting children was just fine as
long as you didn't leave marks?  When the laws changed, and the definition of
abuse became more strict, OF COURSE the numbers of reported cases rose, just
as when the laws on rape were changed, and women didn't have to be black and
blue to report a rape, reports rose.

Why don't you go research child abuse before making silly statements?