An interesting analogy about abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loboto-Me
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here is an analogy that i just made up, much better than this one:

A person driving down the road sees another person stranded on the side of the road and offers them a lift. Once they get on the highway and hit speeds up to 75 mph, the driver changes their mind and decides that they do not have the time or the patience to deal with this person that is riding in their car, so they reach over, open the door and push them out! What have they done wrong, after all it was their car and it is up to them if someone else rides in it or not, it is their choice and their freedom to make that decision.

How about that one?
 
40.png
martino:
Here is an analogy that i just made up, much better than this one:

A person driving down the road sees another person stranded on the side of the road and offers them a lift. Once they get on the highway and hit speeds up to 75 mph, the driver changes their mind and decides that they do not have the time or the patience to deal with this person that is riding in their car, so they reach over, open the door and push them out! What have they done wrong, after all it was their car and it is up to them if someone else rides in it or not, it is their choice and their freedom to make that decision.

How about that one?
Click to expand...
So that person just killed someone because they don’t have patience, right? I’m still kind of confused if we’re supposed to refute it or what.
 
40.png
nike248:
So that person just killed someone because they don’t have patience, right? I’m still kind of confused if we’re supposed to refute it or what.
Click to expand...
No need to refute… I was just demonstrating that anyone can come up with a half baked analogy…I made mine up as I was writing it and it is just as good as the violinist story.
 
Tantum ergo:
This analogy appears to be more and more popular among younger women these days, especially those in higher education. I will not give any links to the sites, because they are literally enough to make you vomit, but there are very popular sites lately that go even further in making women who get pregnant (called, of course, breeders, not women) into some sort of subhuman label, categorizing babies as “cro-ch droppings”, and vilifying mothers and children as selfish, stupid, “wastes of air and space”. . .I could go on but probably you’re as nauseated as I am. . .and, no surprise, ANY PREGNANCY, not just an “unwanted” one, is dealt with as a “disgusting parasite” (the unborn child) being a total misery, horror, a drain upon the mother, an “attack” on the mother’s body, and some even go so far that they simultaneously assert that the fetus is “a blob of unconscious tissue” yet it MALEVOLENTLY ATTACKS the mother’s body. Yeah, it’s not a person or anything, it’s an attacking virus of death. . .

Gen X women are exposed to this–bombarded with this!!–daily.

Pray, pray, and pray some more.
Mary our Mother, forgive your children. . .
Click to expand...
:eek: How do these people think THEY came into the world???
 
40.png
Loboto-Me:
That’s disgusting!

They fail to remember that THEY were one of those “droppings”. I wonder what it is that raised them up from being droppings to being humans?
Click to expand...
who said they have grown from droppings?..😉

they’re ideas and sense of morality sound like “droppings” to me…
 
First, the violinist **has **to be her son.

Second, a baby does not make you lie down for 9 months on your side in a bed that you did not choose, away from all your family, etc.

The analogy would be better if changed to there being some Star Trek subspace extra dimensional link between her and the violinist that will persist for 9 months, and will cause her to feel tired and maybe give her vertigo and barf. I suppose it should give her hemerroids, too.😛

I think a number of ladies out there would tolerate the subspace link thing. Especially if it turns her hair from bone-straight to curly and cures her menstrual cramps for good. Plus she gets to keep her son, duh!
 
40.png
Loboto-Me:
So I’m curious:
Should you be allowed to unplug yourself from the violinist? If not, why?
If you can unplug yourself from the violinist, should a woman be allowed to have an abortion if she so chooses? And if you agree that it’s OK to unplug the violinist, but don’t think it’s OK to unplug the fetus, then what makes the two cases different?
Click to expand...
What makes the two cases different is sex.
 
40.png
martino:
Here is an analogy that i just made up, much better than this one:

A person driving down the road sees another person stranded on the side of the road and offers them a lift. Once they get on the highway and hit speeds up to 75 mph, the driver changes their mind and decides that they do not have the time or the patience to deal with this person that is riding in their car, so they reach over, open the door and push them out! What have they done wrong, after all it was their car and it is up to them if someone else rides in it or not, it is their choice and their freedom to make that decision.

How about that one?
Click to expand...
:rotfl: :rotfl:
 
40.png
martino:
No need to refute… I was just demonstrating that anyone can come up with a half baked analogy…I made mine up as I was writing it and it is just as good as the violinist story.
Click to expand...
Oh. Okay.
 
First of all, as someone above stated, the violinist is not her own child. Parents have obligations to their own children which they do not have toward strangers. This argument concedes that the fetus is just as much a person as a born human being - therefore, you can say “a mother has an obligation to care for her child or to make sure the child is cared for by someone else (which is not an option before birth, of course!)”
Another thing - kidney disease is a natural cause of death. The violinist is not being murdered - he is dying from a disease and would require medical intervention to prevent his death. Abortion, on the other hand, is not natural. It is a medical intervention performed to disrupt a healthy, natural process. The violinist would die without medical intervention – the fetus would die because of medical intervention.
The woman unplugging the violinst is not killing him - she is removing artificial life support. Pregnancy is not artificial life support, it is the natural way for human beings to recieve oxygen, food, and shelter during the first months of life.
Breastfeeding is the natural way for infants to recieve nutrition. If - due to a natural disaster, poverty, etc - a mother does not have the option of formula, does this give her the right to deliberately starve her child? “It’s my body…”
 
The “analogy,” was taken from Judith Jarvis Thompson’s article. “A Defence of Abortion,” published in the Princeton journal, Philosophy and Public affairs. It is refuted quite well by some posters above and also by Donald De Marco in,
Architects of the Culture of Death. In general, true academics have never been very impressed with her work, but radical leftists seem to find it quite profound.
Nuff said. If I go further, I’ll probably get into trouble with the moderator.
 
40.png
Loboto-Me:
To tell you the truth I’m not either… because I couldn’t do it. I don’t care if I was kidnapped or not, I could NOT disconnect knowing that I’d kill the person. It wouldn’t matter to me if it was a violinist or a bum off the street. BUT, I do think that the person who was connected against his/her will would have the right to do so. I don’t feel the situation is completely the same with a fetus though. The fetus deserves to live either way.
Click to expand...
would you be killing the person or allowing the natural process of death take place?
 
that analogy doesn’t really make sense. The violinist is wanted, the unborn child is not. The providers rights were violated the mother’s are not. Abortion violates the rights of the child and God. The violinists rights aren’t violated and God’s rights in this analogy are falsley being presented as being respected.
 
No anology can ever cover true horrors.

I once made a anology comparing a potato masher to people mistreating eachother.
Say that you are only supposed to use a potato masher to make mashed potatoes, but everyone uses it sometimes to make cake batter…you aren’t supposed to but everyone does…does it make it ok?
Well what about mistreatment…everyone mistreats eachoter so who are we to draw a line?

Just as this anology is flawed so is the one above, because nothing can really discribe the true horror of maltreatment just as an anology cannot describe the true horror of abortion
 
All of this talk is senseless. Our Almighty Father in Heaven says that there should be respect for ALL life. God made us and it is not our right to do what we want with our bodies.

That’s the way I see it. 🙂

It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.
  • -Mother Teresa
 
As for someone with kidney disease, my kidneys wouldn’t work to save that violenist. Dialysis would work much better for him.

A baby doesn’t have any other option but to grow in the womb. (well, incubabtors if born a premie).

I always tell people I’m Pro-Choice. I believe you have the right to choose whether or not to have sex. If you get pregnant, your rights are over because that is a baby and that baby did not choose to get conceived.

In all actuality I’m pro-Life, but I like my little statement.
 
Having been pregnant and given birth to two healthy 9lb+ babies, I can see no parallel between being pregnant and being artificially hooked up to an unconscious violinist with kidney ailments. Let me guess- Judith Jarvis Thompson has never been pregnant. Only someone completely clueless to the experience would have come up with this embarrassing comparison.
 
Tantum ergo:
This analogy appears to be more and more popular among younger women these days, especially those in higher education. I will not give any links to the sites, because they are literally enough to make you vomit, but there are very popular sites lately that go even further in making women who get pregnant (called, of course, breeders, not women) into some sort of subhuman label, categorizing babies as “cro-ch droppings”, and vilifying mothers and children as selfish, stupid, “wastes of air and space”. . .I could go on but probably you’re as nauseated as I am. . .and, no surprise, ANY PREGNANCY, not just an “unwanted” one, is dealt with as a “disgusting parasite” (the unborn child) being a total misery, horror, a drain upon the mother, an “attack” on the mother’s body, and some even go so far that they simultaneously assert that the fetus is “a blob of unconscious tissue” yet it MALEVOLENTLY ATTACKS the mother’s body. Yeah, it’s not a person or anything, it’s an attacking virus of death. . .

Gen X women are exposed to this–bombarded with this!!–daily.

Pray, pray, and pray some more.
Mary our Mother, forgive your children. . .
Click to expand...
“Cro-ch droppings”???!!! Are they refering to my beloved son, the one I carried at great cost to myself because I love him more than my life?! Are they referring to my 2 babies in heaven, the ones I mourn 11 and 12 years after I miscarried them, the ones I would give just about anything to have back???!!!

HOW DARE THEY???!!!
I’ll drop them with my fist! (Sorry, that’s a mama bear talking.)
 
Momofone said:
“Cro-ch droppings”???!!! Are they refering to my beloved son, the one I carried at great cost to myself because I love him more than my life?! Are they referring to my 2 babies in heaven, the ones I mourn 11 and 12 years after I miscarried them, the ones I would give just about anything to have back???!!!

HOW DARE THEY???!!!
I’ll drop them with my fist! (Sorry, that’s a mama bear talking.)
Click to expand...

Although it’s probably not the most charitable thing, I got your back!

I can’t believe the way some of these pro-aborts talk about babies.
 
The scenario turns both the violinist and the unborn child into a parasitic being by their nature. Such an argumentation is sickening and disrespectful to both violinist and child and ought to show you the intent of ideology from which the person who postuates it is coming from. It ought, therefore, to be rejected as a valid argument on it’s very underlying premise.

In any case, one wonders what the questioner would respond if one were to answer that, yes, a moral obligation exists to stay connected to the violinist. Would they still be playing the same song?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top