You alway hear Right To Lifers state that it is not a woman’s right to decide what happens to her body. She does not have the right to argue against the government FOR an abortion.
What would people here think if the goveremnet decided “based on health” all males would be circumcised and you do not have the right to say what happens to YOUR body. You must be clipped.
That’s the worst analogy I’ve yet to see and misses the lynchpin of the argument against abortion: that it’s murder. You may not agree with this, but you can’t just ignore it.
The violin analogy is much better:
In A Defense of Abortion, Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion by appeal to a thought experiment:
You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist’s circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.
Thomson takes it that you may now permissibly unplug yourself from the violinist even though this will cause his death
Even this is not truly the same situation because those who get pregnant chose to have sex and risk the consequences while in the ‘justifiable murder’ of the violinist, the person did not choose to be kidnapped and attached to the violinist.[/quote]
Kind of a big hole in the analogy…