Identify any example of fallacies in the following passage. Tell why you think these are fallacies, and identify which category they belong in, if they fit any category we’ve described.

1.Letter to the editor: “Andrea Keene’s selective morality is once again showing through in her July 15 letter. This time she expresses her abhorrence of abortion. But how we see only what we choose to see! I wonder
if any of the anti-abortionists have considered the widespread use of
fertility drugs as the moral equivalent of abortion, and, if they have,why they haven’t come out against them, too. The use of these drugs
frequently results in multiple births, which leads to the death of one
of the infants, often after an agonizing struggle for survival. According to the rules of the pro-lifers, isn’t this murder?”
— North-State Record

2.In one of her columns, Abigail Van Buren printed the letter of “I’d rather
be a widow.” The letter writer, a divorcée, complained about widows
who said they had a hard time coping. Far better, she wrote, to be a
widow than to be a divorcée, who are all “rejects” who have been “publicly
dumped” and are avoided “like they have leprosy.” Abby recognized
the pseudoreasoning for what it was, though she did not call it by our
name. What is our name for it?

3.Letter to the editor: “Once again the Park Commission is considering
closing North Park Drive for the sake of a few joggers and bicyclists.
These so-called fitness enthusiasts would evidently have us give up to
them for their own private use every last square inch of Walnut Grove.
Then anytime anyone wanted a picnic, he would have to park at the
edge of the park and carry everything in—ice chests, chairs, maybe even
grandma. I certainly hope the Commission keeps the entire park open
for everyone to use.”

4.“Some Christian—and other—groups are protesting against the placing,
on federal property near the White House, of a set of plastic figurines representing a devout Jewish family in ancient Judaea. The protestors would
of course deny that they are driven by any anti-Semitic motivation. Still,
we wonder: Would they raise the same objections (of unconstitutionality,
etc.) if the scene depicted a modern, secularized Gentile family?”
— National Review

When you have thought through this and come up with an answer, please repost.

1. The fallacy in this passage is the Tu Quoque fallacy. The writer attempts to dismiss Andrea Keene's argument against abortion by accusing her of being inconsistent in her moral stance. This fallacy suggests that because someone is not consistent in their beliefs or actions, their argument is invalid. In this case, the writer claims that the use of fertility drugs, which can result in the death of one of the infants, is equivalent to abortion and questions why anti-abortionists have not come out against them. However, just because some anti-abortionists may not have spoken out against fertility drugs does not invalidate Keene's argument against abortion.

2. The fallacy in this passage is Ad Hominem. The writer, "I'd rather be a widow," attacks divorcées by calling them "rejects" and suggesting that they are avoided like they have leprosy. This fallacy diverts attention from the actual argument or topic at hand and instead attacks the character or identity of the person making the argument. The writer dismisses divorcées' struggles by attacking their personal circumstances rather than addressing the issue being discussed.

3. The fallacy in this passage is Straw Man. The writer exaggerates the argument made by the Park Commission by suggesting that closing North Park Drive for joggers and bicyclists would result in giving up every last square inch of Walnut Grove for their private use. This fallacy distorts or misrepresents the opponent's argument to make it easier to attack or refute. The writer presents an extreme and unlikely scenario to argue against the closure of North Park Drive, rather than addressing the actual concerns or benefits of such a decision.

4. The fallacy in this passage is Red Herring. The writer diverts attention from the issue of the protests against placing figurines representing a devout Jewish family near the White House by speculating about how the protestors would react if the scene depicted a modern, secularized Gentile family. This fallacy introduces an irrelevant topic to distract from the main issue. The writer shifts the focus to a hypothetical scenario that does not address the concerns raised by the protestors, avoiding a meaningful discussion about the original topic.