#1 pro choice argument: the Violinist

Even if it did apply to more than 0.005% of abortions, it's still a weak argument.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• CyberLink
• YouCam

[TumshieX]

I am pro choice myself, however I do agree that the violinist example seems somewhat weak. Maybe if I sat down and really had a talk to an expert in the violinist example I could be convinced that it was a great argument. But I agree with you that the situation doesn't really apply (in most cases, as you said).

I think the important thing about abortion is that it doesn't cause any unnecessary suffering (i.e. the fetus doesn't suffer).

[miggetymike1]

@TumshieX It appears that you are saying that abortion should be allowed because it doesn't cause any unnecessary suffering. That's a very dangerous standard for killing a human. There are a lot of ways someone could kill you where you wouldn't suffer, that doesn't make it right. It seems to me that the "important thing" is that abortion kills a human life without proper justification.

[electrobutt]

Do you even know why abortion was made legal in the first place? Cuz women were DYING! They still do. 70,000 women die every year around the world due to illegal abortion, and SO DOES THE FETUS. You're not saving lives here dickweed. You're killing women needlessly, you're controlling their bodies and lives and leaving 220,000 kids orphaned because their moms just died from an illegal abortion. If it's not your uterus, it's not your decision. End of this.

[david52875]

@Albanezkaa You are a complete fucktard. If your going to call his argument weak and not back it up, guess what that makes you? a fucktard.

[rooskayaLUV]

damn!, this guys got some sexy piercing eyes!

[Albanezkaa]

i'm sorry but are you wearing eye liner? lmao....and you have a weak argument :) against a born right to vindiacte ones own bodily choice.

[curbyII]

I don't know whether you're familiar with the Trolley Problem, but this seems to be another instance of that to me. People feel intuitively that side-effects and intended effects are morally different even if the result is the same. Abortion is an intended effect (like pushing the fat man off the bridge) and unhooking the violinist is a side-effect (like diverting the trolley onto the track with one worker).

[TumshieX]

@miggetymike1

Suffering includes mental/emotional suffering. Any law allowing me to be killed without consent would make me very uncomfortable. This is not the case with a fetus.

Furthermore, if I was killed (even without me suffering) my family and friends would suffer. Again, not the case with the fetus. The only way the scenarios would be comparable would be if all my family and friends somehow agreed that we were all better of with me gone...

[dave4248]

If pro-lifers stuck to scientific arguements against abortion, they'd convert me. Unfortunately they always resort to telling me that an invisible man in the sky told them to be anti abortion. That's where they lose me.