I’ve missed you. Ok, here are the show notes for today!
(click here to listen in a new window)
Pro-Choicer Advocate’s claim:
If a woman can be forced to donate her body during pregnancy, we should be able to force someone to donate their kidney.
It is important to understand that the pro-choice advocate believes that these two situations are morally analogous. They believe that pregnancy is supererogatory in the same way that donating an organ is supererogatory. We have to ask the question, what is the morally relevant difference between organ donation and abortion?
It seems to me that this is just a confusion about how rights work.
If we kill an unborn human being, we are violating their right to life (as well as other rights, like bodily autonomy). If you refuse to donate blood or organs, you’re not violating anyone else’s rights. However, taking an organ from you without your consent is a clear violation of your rights.
In using this analogy, the pro-choice advocate wants us to conclude that it is legitimate to violate another human being’s right to life because you will not allow someone else to violate your rights. Is it really a violation of a woman’s rights to suggest that she ought to continue a pregnancy? Check out the episode 8 on bodily autonomy and episode 9 on the violinist.
My grandmother’s obituary in the Buffalo News (including unborn Cole)
bonus: a great, short article on the violinist argument from StR called “Unstringing the Violinist”