A response to jj thomsons essay a defense of abortion

But I would stress that I am not arguing that people do not have a right to life--quite to the contrary, it seems to me that the primary control we must place on the acceptability of an account of rights is that it should turn out in that account to be a truth that all persons have a right to life.

Clearly, Thomson argues, you are not morally required to continue being the host. Something like this, I take it. She reflects on two prospects whether the right to life is being given the bare minimum to sustain life or ir the right to life is merely the right not to be killed.

If everybody is to refrain from killing that violinist, then everybody must refrain from doing a great many different sorts of things. When it comes to equality in the workplace with which I agree with the feminists there is no problem.

They may wish to assume responsibility for it, or they may not wish to. But I think we should sidestep this issue and leave it open, for at any rate the argument certainly does not establish that all abortion is unjust killing. If the doctor refuses, then the woman is denied her right.

I said it would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide me with it, but that I had no right against him that he should do so. By the tenth week, for example, it already has a face, arms and less, fingers and toes; it has internal organs, and brain activity is detectable.

Noonan of the U. The emendation which may be made at this point is this: Is it to be said, "Ah, well, it follows that in this case she has a right to the touch of his hand on her brow, and so it would be an injustice in him to refuse"?

Neither have more of a right to life then you do because they both depend on you for life. But if the woman houses the child, it should be remembered that she is a person who houses it. Nevertheless it seems to me plain you ought to allow him to use your kidneys for that hour--it would be indecent to refuse.

The fact that the situation with the violinist is essentially a medical impossibility may confuse our intuitions on the topic. That is, while he had no right against us that we should give him the use of your kidneys, it might be argued that he anyway has a right against us that we shall not now intervene and deprive him Of the use of your kidneys.

There he sits stolidly eating his way through the box. This is pertinent because pregnancy reduction requires a medical procedure, therefore involves a third party, a bystander, that you are asking to help you in your own self defense and because multiple pregnancy is most often a higher risk to the mother as well as the child.

If, for example, a late-term abortion accidentally results in the birth of a living baby, then Thomson would conclude that the mother has no right to kill the baby. Arguments of this form are sometimes called "slippery slope arguments"--the phrase is perhaps self-explanatory--and it is dismaying that opponents of abortion rely on them so heavily and uncritically.

What may be done for her? The violinist, even with his right of life included, has no right to your body. And I am suggesting that if assuming responsibility for it would require large sacrifices, then they may refuse.Unlike most editing & proofreading services, we edit for everything: grammar, spelling, punctuation, idea flow, sentence structure, & more.

Response to Judith Jarvis Thomsons A Defense for Abortion

Get started now! A Defense of Abortion by Judith Jarvis Thomson Essay Words | 5 Pages 'A Defense of Abortion' by Judith Jarvis Thomson In the article 'A Defense of Abortion' Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that abortion is morally permissible even if the fetus is considered a.

J.J. Thomson’s argument in A Defense of Abortion is that the one thing a person has rights to is his/her body and the right to control what happens with it.

Abortion/ Response To Judith Jarvis Thomson's

Thomson also states that there is an innate. - Response to Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense for Abortion Judith Jarvis Thomson, in "A Defense of Abortion", argues that even if we grant that fetuses have a fundamental right to life, in many cases the rights of the mother override the rights of a fetus.

“A Defense of Abortion” – JUDITH JARVIS THOMSON. Thomson’s (T) imaginative examples and controversial conclusions have made “A Defense of Abortion“ perhaps “the most widely reprinted essay in all of contemporary philosophy.”.

T does not think the conceptus (a neutral way of referring to the fetus) is a person from the moment of. Judith Jarvis Thomson: A Defense of Abortion. I think, rather, that there are drastic limits to the right of self-defense.

If someone threatens you with death unless you torture someone else to death, I think you have not the right, even to save your life, to do so.

But the case under consideration here is very different.

A response to jj thomsons essay a defense of abortion
Rated 5/5 based on 60 review