For part one of this series, you can go here. For part two, this is where you should be. For part three, follow this link. And here’s part four. 7. Do parents have a special responsibility to their offspring? Throughout this series I have engaged Thomson’s analogies and found all of them to be lacking. […]
For part one of this series, go here. For part two, this is the place to be. And for part three, mosey on over this way. So far Thomson’s essay has suffered from many critical errors. None of her analogies have helped establish that a woman has a right to abort for any reason, except […]
For part one of this series, go here. For part two of this series, go here. Section 4. Is abortion unjust killing? Thomson begins this section by considering that “in the most ordinary sort of case, to deprive someone of what he has a right to is to treat him unjustly.” She illustrates this with […]
[Today’s entry is re-posted from “Yeah, but…“] We hear a lot about bodily rights during the abortion debate. Moving beyond the abortion debate to society in general, I think it’s clear that bodily rights are fundamental. It seems most other pro-lifers think it’s clear too. You’ll be hard-pressed to find a pro-lifer that says they’d […]
For part one of this series, click here. Section 1. The “extreme” pro-life view. [1] I agree with Thomson that the view that abortion is impermissible even to save the mother’s life is an extreme pro-life view. I believe that abortions are justified if the mother’s life is in immediate jeopardy. [2] She does wonder […]
Probably the most famous argument against the pro-life position is Judith Jarvis Thomson’s Violinist Analogy, in which you are attached, against your will, to a famous unconscious violinist to prevent his dying from a kidney ailment. I have already responded to the violinist analogy in previous articles. But within the original essay where the violinist […]
[Guest Blogger Nathaniel presents a nuanced perspective on the rape exception. Secular Pro-Life takes no formal stance on the rape exception, but encourages discussion on the issue. For more information, see here.] It’s hard to make nuanced arguments in the abortion debate because folks on both sides tend to see a debate primarily as a […]
[Guest Blogger Simon takes a particular interest in the philosophical aspects of the abortion debate. Here he considers the important role of bodily integrity.] When studying the philosophy of abortion, it is often very hard to find new perspectives. Many arguments run along the usual lines of bodily autonomy, personhood, the moral value of autonomy and […]
[This post is the first in a point-counterpoint debate. See the argument against the rape exception here.] According to Gallup, 59% of self-described pro-lifers believe abortion should be legal in cases of rape. This is a higher percentage than I expected. Anecdotally, it seems most pro-lifers I interact with believe there should be no rape […]
In my opinion, bodily integrity—the idea that no person has the right to use another person’s body against their will–is the strongest pro-choice argument. Consider the court case McFall v Shimp: McFall suffered from a life-threatening bone marrow disease and his cousin, Shimp, was a compatible bone marrow donor. Shimp refused to donate bone marrow. […]
It’s crucial that we demonstrate that anyone can–and everyone should–oppose abortion. Thanks to you, we are working to change minds, transform our culture, and protect our prenatal children. Every donation supports our ability to provide nonsectarian, nonpartisan arguments against abortion. Read more details here. Please donate today.
We’d be happy to keep in touch. Subscribe for access to our newsletter and other updates.
Already subscribed? Click here to hide this.
