Response to Thomson

Thomson discusses the idea of self-defense and a right to life in her piece. She talks about how  the right to life is not an absolute right, which would make abortion, in some cases, morally permissible. With this idea in mind, she also says that people do not a duty to save others and I would like to back that up by saying I agree and that one has more of a duty to save themselves in cases when your life is at stake. However, in cases where you have the chance to help another person and there is no risk to you, I believe you have a moral duty to help that person. I want to look at a common case that is brought up, the pregnant woman finds out that the birth of the child will kill her unless she gets an abortion, in which case she can save her life. I believe that in cases such as this it is acceptable for the woman to have an abortion if she finds value in her life and her future, which is an argument that Marquis brings up in his piece. She is the thinker in this case and has control of the situation, while unfortunately the unborn baby, who also has a lot of potential in its future life, does not have much of a say in the decision made. The mother has a duty to herself. Another case that can be used for this situation would be the case with the unconscious violinist that is hooked up to you for survival. I believe that in a case such as this it would be morally inexcusable for you to not help the violinist. If you have the resources to help someone and it  does not harm you in anyway then you have a moral duty to help that person. You can help the violinist and cause no harm to yourself while saving another valuable life. This relates back to the abortion in the sense that if you choose to have an abortion and kill the potential life for no reason other than it would be an inconvenience to you then I believe it  to be morally inexcusable as well. However, for me, outstanding circumstances that put either the mother or life after birth of the child at risk, then I find the abortion to be excusable in a sense. There is a certain threshold or criteria that I would need to work out in order to set a line as to what are acceptable risks. My main concern is that the person in question has a duty to themselves overall, but that does not mean they do not have a duty to others as well. A scenario I think that will relate well to my overall thoughts is when you are on a plane and the air masks come down you are supposed to help yourself first and then help those around you. You have to put yourself first in order to help those that need help.