But anti-abortion campaigners said the review sought to “minimise” the psychological effect of terminating a pregnancy.
Why? Why is it that even when a real, scientific study is done, people refuse to believe the results? They are so attached to rhetoric that they do not let reality affect their opinions.
I see this from so many different types of people. While some groups are worse than others (certain parts of the anti-abortion crowd, for example), it is undoubtedly a widespread problem. Perhaps the worst people are those who believe and share only the findings that reinforce their rhetoric.
There are people who ignore science entirely, but typically it is easy to identify that person. The people who ignore only science (and social science) that contradicts their beliefs, on the other hand, aren’t always as easy to spot.
I think more emphasis needs to be placed on science in schools, if only to counteract the anti-science and anti-evidence people out in the world. I generally appreciate when people alert me to evidence that I am unaware of (sometimes I get angry at first, but in the long run I like it). The United States has a strong anti-science culture. People consistently argue that science is a religion (when it’s really not), they say putting confidence in scientific methods and principles is no different than having faith in religion.
What we get out of this is a large body of the public that refuses medical treatment in favor of quackery, refuses to admit that there is, at the least, a very strong case for evolutionary theory, and tries to control women’s bodies based solely on rhetoric. I wish there were an easy solution (a smack upside the head, perhaps?) for eliminating unreasonable anti-science culture. And just for the record, worrying about the devastating toll some treatments can take on patients and wanting to mitigate that is not the same as believing water with memory can cure them.