Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jenny Hatch
I'd like to see some of that information please. Links? Quotes?
|
Jenny, your data does nothing to support your argument and some is outright laughable. Point by point, using your own system:
1) Sure violence is a problem today. However, birthing drugs are a very new phenomenon, historically speaking. I'm sure you'll agree with that. In that light, is violence more, less or the same problem it was 50 years ago? 100 years ago? 500 years ago? 1000 years ago? 5000 years ago? Violence has been a problem since evolution created the predator/prey relationship. Cows and sheep perpetrate violence on grass every day. Humans have perpetrated violence against each other for as long as there have been humans. Violence is instictual.
2) Social violence may or may not be a learned behavior, but domestic violence is not the breeding grounds for social violence. Unsocialized children are very violent. Witnessing domestic violence does not automatically condemn a child to be socailly violent. It increases the chance, but it is by no means automatic.
3) Where is your data that supports the argument that children that do not form the immediate bond with their parents are more violent? What you're saying is that premature babies have a higher incident of crime, particularly violent crime, since that is the usual measuring stick for these things. I have never seen a study supporting anything of the sort, and the suggestion seems to ignore any later influence that a parent may have over a child.
4) You're quoting a sample size of 14 as fact? That's a far reach. I would expect that any study of death row inmates, regardless of age, would reveal major neurological impairments, psychotic disorders, and low I.Q. scores. However your last claim, that these are the result of a lack of prenatal love, is magically pulled from the air. By what standard do you measure love? How do you quantify it? Can we develop an over-the-counter prenatal love test that expectant mothers can use to document their love just to make sure they're giving enough? By "nourishment", I'm going to assume that you mean "nutrition", because the contrary would make less sense than your love claim. Obviously prenatal nutrition is important, but please show me any scientific study that equates violence with a lack of prenatal nutrition.
5) You've got your hard facts about circumcision right, but then you go and equate circumcision and sex. Where did that come from? Since I'm circumcised, I'm going to beat my wife? Where are the studies showing that uncircumcized men are less violent? Let me point out that the majority of men in the Third World are uncircumsized. It's a good thing that the Third World is the bastion of peace and understanding in the world... Real world evidence shows that circumcision has absolutely no effect on the level of violence in a society.
6) We finally agree on something. But it has absolutely nothing to do with your greater arguement.
7) What birth complications? What about children that do not experience these unnnamed complications but still experience the rejection? What is their rate of criminality?
8) What studies show that human babies mutilate themselves after being separated from their mothers? What is the average period of separation of the monkeys compared with the mothers? What you're saying is that if human babies are taken over to a scale to be weighed and measured, they are more likely to commit acts of violence.
9) For the first time in history? Give me a break. Maybe they're being reported for the first time in history, but there's no data to suggest that it didn't happen before 1928, 1893, 1973 or any other arbitrary date you want to use.
10) Rape is a horrible crime, but what does it have to do with your point? My heart goes out to the victims, but you've presented no evidence to support that babies separated from their mothers or born to mothers who take birthing drugs have greater rate of criminal acts, let alone rape, than those who don't. I'll bet that you are unaware of the fact that rape is a very common occurrence in the animal community as well. Monkeys, seals and some birds all practice it. That by no means justifies it among humans, but only goes to illustrate my point that you're trying to shoehorn irrelevant data to make your point, which only goes to detract from it.
Jenny, just because you quote statistics doesn't mean that there's any correlation between them. I can use statistics to make an argument that my average golf scores in the month of July directly affect both the weather in Madrid and the price of oil. Just because I lump two numbers together doesn't mean that they have any influence on each other. That's what you're trying to do here, and I can't intellectually accept any of your arguments since there doesn't seem to be any logic involved.
Your overall point here is suffering because of the arguments you're making. You'll notice that I haven't really questioned your greater idea here, only the way that you're justifying it. Freebirthing may or may not be a good thing or the right thing, but the claims that you're making about it smell heavily of snake oil.