Right To Life Argument By Stormy Thomson

756 Words2 Pages

Stormy Almond
Thomson criticizes the “right to life” argument using several thought experiments such as the violinist thought experiment in which a person has been kidnapped by the crazy fans of a violinist who is dying from a failing kidney. The person is expected to stay connected to the violinist for approximately nine months, or longer if required. According to the “right to life” argument, the violinist is a person and deserves to have a life; therefore, regardless of the fact that the person that is hooked up to him is a victim and unwilling, it is that persons’ obligation to stay hooked up and save the life of the violinist. Thomson argues that a person, regardless of circumstance, has the right to control what goes on with their body. She argues that if the person decides to stay connected to the violinist they are within their rights and if they decide to disconnect and the violinist dies, they are in their rights as well.
She makes the connection between the violinist and the unborn baby while the kidnapped …show more content…

This unfortunate victim, the unborn baby, was created out of a situation of that persons’ making. Although they understood the chances they were taking when engaging in that activity, they do not believe anything could happen to them or that they were adequately prepared to handle that situation. Each of the persons mentioned, the victim, the unwillingly kidney donor, and the mother still deserve the right to control their body regardless of the choices they make. On the other hand, one would argue that if victimization or unplanned/unprepared pregnancy occurs, then the victim or mother should take responsibility of their actions. I would reply that for the victim there is no such thing as taking responsibility for being a victim. In terms of pregnancy, there are many ways to take responsibility for it and abortion is an

Open Document