Please Help Identify the fallacy and explain Why fallacy fit that category . Would Someone Check My Answers to the following ( 4 ) passages . Assignment is past due ! I am having serious trouble on this assignment .

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 abortions , 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?” ANSWER : ( Post Hoc Fallacy )
I think this is a post hoc fallacy because the letter to the editor show cause and effect from using fertility drugs .

3. In one of her columns, Abigail Van Buren Printed the letter of “I’d rather be a widow “. The letter writer, a divorcee, complained about widows who said they had a hard time coping. Far better, she wrote, to be a widow than to be a divorcee’ who are all rejects “who have been “publicly dumped “and are avoided “like they have leprosy.” Abby recognized the pseudoresoning for what it was, though she did not call it by our name. What is our name for it? ANSWER :(poisoning the well fallacy )
I think this is poisoning the well fallacy because the writer is trying to give a negative view of her personal opinion about widowed women . Referring to divorcee s ‘ as all rejects “ who have been “ publicly dumped “ and are avoided “ like they have leprosy . “ I not a proven statement .

5. 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.” ANSWER :( Wishful Thinking Fallacy )
I think this is Wishful thinking fallacy because the letter to the editor is providing her claim desiring the park to remain open for everyone to use .

6.” Some Christian -and other –groups are protesting against the placing of 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?”ANSWER : (Group Think Fallacy)
I think this is a group fallacy because there is more than one person making the claim .

dkjj

1. The fallacy in passage 1 is not Post Hoc Fallacy, but rather it is a Red Herring fallacy. The letter writer is diverting attention from the topic of abortion by bringing up the use of fertility drugs and arguing that they are morally equivalent to abortions. This is a tactic to distract from the main point of the letter and to undermine the pro-life argument against abortion. The fallacy fits this category because it introduces an irrelevant topic (use of fertility drugs) to shift the focus away from the main argument.

3. The fallacy in passage 3 is not Poisoning the Well fallacy. Instead, it is an Ad Hominem fallacy. The writer is attacking divorcees by calling them "rejects" and implying that they have been publicly dumped and are avoided like they have leprosy. This personal attack on divorcees does not address the argument or claims made by widows, but instead tries to discredit divorcees based on personal characteristics. The fallacy fits this category because it seeks to undermine the credibility of divorcees without addressing the actual points they make.

5. The fallacy in passage 5 is not Wishful Thinking Fallacy. It is actually a Straw Man fallacy. The letter writer misrepresents the argument for closing North Park Drive by exaggerating it to suggest that the joggers and bicyclists want exclusive use of the entire Walnut Grove park for their private use. This misrepresentation of the argument makes it easier for the writer to dismiss it by portraying it as unreasonable. The fallacy fits this category because it sets up a straw man (an exaggerated or distorted version of the actual argument) to attack and refute.

6. The fallacy in passage 6 is not Group Think Fallacy. It is an example of False Equivalence fallacy. The writer suggests that the protestors would not object to the figurines if they depicted a modern, secularized Gentile family, implying that their objections are motivated by anti-Semitism. However, the two scenarios (depicting a devout Jewish family and a modern, secularized Gentile family) are not equivalent and do not warrant the same reactions. The fallacy fits this category because it falsely equates two different scenarios and implies that the reactions to them should be the same.