Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Abortion

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article lists examples of Bias in Wikipedia, related to Abortion:

  1. Wikipedia has a large article detailing anti-abortion violence committed around the world,[1] but there is no article about pro-abortion violence. There is no article for "Pro-choice violence"[2] and "Pro-abortion violence" bizarrely redirects to the "Abortion debate" article.[3] Before being redirected, the "Pro-abortion violence" article was biased towards downplaying the reality of violence committed by supporters of abortion.[4] For example, while the "Anti-abortion violence" article matter-of-factly begins: "Anti-abortion violence is violence committed against individuals and organizations that provide abortion." ...the "Pro-abortion violence" article dismissingly began: "Pro-abortion violence (or pro-choice violence) is a term used in the pro-life movement to characterize acts of violence committed by abortion practitioners or abortion advocates against those who oppose abortion or against pregnant women. The former is regarded as factual while the latter is just "a term used in the pro-life movement."
  2. Wikipedia changes the meaning of a key quote from an abortion-breast cancer article in the Lancet medical journal (Beral, et al.), falsely stating that it "concluded that abortion does not increase a woman's risk of developing breast cancer."[5] The Lancet article said no such thing about a woman's decision to have an abortion, which does increase the woman's risk of breast cancer. Rather, the Lancet article limited its assertion to a claim about the overall effect of a pregnancy that terminates early.[6]
  3. Wikipedia's entry on Benazir Bhutto has nearly 8,000 words on all aspects of her life, and yet not one word acknowledging that she led the movement against the United Nations' creating a new international right to abortion.[7]
  4. Wikipedia claimed that conservatives opposed to abortion are described as "anti-baby" or "anti-family". Wikipedia removed this bias only after it was identified here.[8]
  5. Wikipedia denies and omits the results of 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies showing increased risk of breast cancer from abortion.[9] Wikipedia's entry also omits the evidence of abortion causing increased premature birth of subsequent children.[10] [11]
  6. Wikipedia omits an entry on fetal pain, and instead redirects visitors to a different entry that denies the obvious pain experienced by unborn children during an abortion. Nine peer-reviewed studies confirm that there is fetal pain beginning at 20 weeks, as presented during legislative hearings in 2010 on the Nebraska Abortion Pain Prevention Act, but Wikipedia insists on liberal denial and citation to many implausible, pro-abortion claims.[12]
  7. As of 5 February 2010, there is an ongoing discussion on moving the Pro-life article to Anti-abortion. Wikipedia even manipulates the term "pro-choice" by changing it to the even more biased term "Abortion-rights movement" rather than "pro-abortion".[13]
  8. Wikipedia's Abortion and mental health page violates their own WP:POV policy in that it fails even to give any weight to the considerable view that abortion does cause mental health problems. Neglecting reviews that show a connection, it currently says, with a reference only to one study that concludes there is not a connection: "Systematic reviews of the scientific literature have concluded that that there are no difference in the long-term mental health of women who obtain induced abortions as compared to women in appropriate control groups." There are also numerous unresolved WP:POV discussions on its talk page, yet its administrators refuse to allow {{cleanup-section}} tags to remain, as though the WP:POV issues have already been resolved.
  9. Wikipedia's entry on John C. Willke,[14] a prominent physician who has been a pro-life leader for four decades, says little about Willke's career and twice uses biased-loaded adjectives like "discredited" to describe Willke. The article was flagged as biased for over a year without any improvement.

References

Personal tools