Project ETD

Section Three - Violins?

Has anyone been paying attention to american politics lately?

*Insert evil laughter here*

Well, I have. Honestly, I feel like I should be on an episode of "My Strange Addiction" because I can't stop myself from watching the news.

But I'm getting off topic. In one of the debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the moderator stated that Clinton had been quoted as saying that "the fetus has no constitutional rights".

And she would be correct to say so.

Like I said in the last section, I want to take a look at how abortion is defended in light of the knowledge that a human life begins at conception. Trust me, there are a lot of ways pro-choice advocates defend abortion, but I'm only going to focus on a few.

I can hear a pro-choice advocate screaming at the screen right now, "You have to cover all of the defenses or you're being biased! You're only selecting the weak arguments and the ones you can counter! That's not fair!"

My response is simply no I don't, because not all of them are legitimate. For instance, I find the "Famous Violinist" defense isn't legitimate and I'll explain why. In short, it's very misleading. Ill put a link to the actual defense at the bottom, but for now I'm just going to paraphrase.

In the Famous Violinist approach, we have to start with what I was saying in the last section - human life begins at conception - and take it to the next step: the unborn human has the right to life.

Next is the hypothetical situation. You wake up in a hospital bed tomorrow morning, only to find that you are lying back to back with a world famous violinist. Oh, and by the way, he is unconscious and has some serious kidney problems. While you were asleep last night, the Society of Music Lovers did some research and found that your blood type was a perfect match for his, so they kidnapped you and hooked up your circulatory system to his. That way, your kidneys can filter out the poisons in his blood as well yours.

The hospital director then comes up to you and says, "We're really sorry this happened, and I would have stopped them from doing this to you if I had known, but now that he's hooked up to you there's nothing we can do. You have to stay hooked up to him in this bed."

Shocked, you ask him why he can't do anything. He says, "Well, if we unplug him, it will definitely kill him. Because of the constitution, has the right to life and unplugging him would be murder. But I do have some good news! He should be cured in about nine months and we will unhook you then."

Now for the question. Are you morally obligated to accept this situation that you find yourself in? I mean, it would be a really nice thing for you to do, but should you be forced by law to endure this situation? The right to life outweighs the right to decide what happens in and to your body, so you're stuck in bed with him until he's able to function on his own. Wouldn't you be outraged at what has happened to you and demand the right to be able to unplug him?

I know I would!

And that's how the Famous Violinist defense plays out. So why isn't this a legitimate defense? Isn't that exactly what an unborn human does to its mother? Here's the problem; that's certainly not the whole story when it comes to abortion. I'm going to be Paul Harvey today and give you... wait for it...

The rest of the story. (Look him up if you don't get it)

When you were about 13, one of your parents pulled you aside and said, "It's time we had a talk about The Society of Music Lovers." Reluctantly, you go to the living room to have a one on one chat with your parent about the society (even though your friend told you about them a few years ago). They tell you that the existence of The Society of Music Lovers is a fact of life. "They're a wonderful group of people," your parent says, "dedicated to making sure that we never have to worry about the well being of people who create music. They're always holding events and fundraisers, but they are invitation only. Eighteen is the legal age to be able to go to one of the events, and anyone that goes to one of these events says that it was one of the best experiences that they've ever had; that you haven't lived until you've been to a Society of Music Lovers event."

Then your parent's expression slowly begins to change to one of concern. "But, if you don't want to help out a musician, then don't go to one of their events," your parent says.

"What do you mean?" you ask.

"Well," they say with a sigh, "it's my advice that unless you're willing to give up the rights to your body for a while, you don't need to attend one of these events. If the society finds out that you have something that a musician needs, and you're at one of their events, it is very possible they will take it. After all, you are at an event hosted by them. If a musician needs some money, the Society of Music Lovers will take some from you and give it to a musician. And if a musician has a kidney ailment, they will hook you up to their circulatory system and you will wake up in the hospital back to back with a musician until they are healed. It's a fact of nature and there's nothing you can do about it."

Your eyes widen in horror.

"But don't worry," your parent assures you. "It doesn't always happen, and lots of people go to these events for the fun of it with no intention of helping any musicians. It's not one-hundred percent effective, but there are ways to prevent them from using your body against your will if you decide to go to one of these events."

They then proceed to tell you about the different ways to keep the Society of Music Lovers away while at one of their events - from repellents, to special apparel and accessories. "But," they say, "the only way to truly keep them away from you is to not go to an event."

Near the end of the awkward conversation, they add that sometimes a Society of Music Lovers member will get to know a person just to use their body to help themselves and not a musician, or, in rare cases will abduct someone off of the streets instead of using someone from an event (which is illegal), and hook them up to someone else's circulatory system. It's sad, but it's nothing new. It has happened all throughout history.

Fast forward to being back in the hospital bed and attached to the unconscious violinist.

Why did I add so much to the beginning of the story? To show how the "Famous Violinist" approach only deals with one issue: rape while unconscious. If, in the story, you hadn't been kidnapped, but instead went to a Society of Music Lovers event the night before, and didn't wear your repellent, or society proof apparel, whose fault is it that you're now attached to an unconscious violinist?

It's your fault, isn't it?

I guess what really gets me is that the point of the "Famous Violinist" argument isn't really about making you think about the heinous act of rape while unconscious. Instead, the point is to make a pro-life/anti-abortion advocate place a different value on the life of a human dependent on one's body; that the human dependent on you that was placed without your consent has less value or is illegitimate, as opposed to a life created on purpose or even on accident. Then the pro-choice/pro-abortion advocate can say, "How can one fetus be legitimate and another not? If you think one type of fetus has no right, then none have the right to life." In short, the argument only has one point: to devalue the life created without consent, therefore devaluing all life similar to it.

But here's the thing. The fact that anyone gets hooked up to someone else without consent is a symptom, not the problem. When you combine the "Famous Violinist" defense with the rest of the story that I gave you, or even when you look at them individually, the only legitimate issue this argument brings up is this.

What the hell are we gonna do about those scoundrels from the Society of Music Lovers that are doing things with people that aren't consenting by attending one of their events?? 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't realize it, but I think I could write a book about this subject. There's still a lot to be said about this specific issue, but I'm not going to continue on it unless asked to. I mean, I didn't even get to the part where they show these Society of Music Lovers parties on television and movies. They write songs about what they do at these events and companies use them for marketing. There's even a book about a guy taking all kinds of things from a woman and giving them to musicians, and she loves every minute of it... Sounds like their culture is inundated with The Society of Music Lovers. Could that be part of the problem?

I'm pretty sure my profile says I might be crazy

And as promised, the link to the Famous Violinist argument in its entirety.

http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm