A Selfless Brother's Box Of Chocolates Summary

In A Defense of Abortion Thompson presents an argument against the morality of abortion by showing the superiority of women’s rights through several different analogous cases. The case of focus will be case eight, “ A Selfless Brother’s Box of Chocolates.” In scenario one, Thompson argues that an older brother has a box of chocolates while his younger brother has nothing; the question of appeal is does the younger brother automatically have a right to these chocolates? The box of chocolates represents a woman’s body while the younger brother represents the fetus. Although it would be nice for the older brother (mother) to share his box of chocolates (mothers body) he is not obligated to share them with anyone even if he is perceived as a selfish, greedy, or a stingy person. In

If life was not started at conception in these cases and scientifically the unborn child could not be having any thoughts or actions running through the brain the argument would be stronger to persuade the anti-abortion side. Personally, taking away an unborn living thinking fetus’s rights just because we cannot hear them or see them physically does not seem justified. In case eight I do not see how women can just say “well it is nice of me to share my body so I will or I will not because I don’t have to,” when they have a person breathing and thinking inside of them that could be the next inventor or great doctor of the world. For Thompson to be more persuasive to the opposing side she should try discounting life at conception and arguing how the fetus can not have thoughts, therefore it cannot have desires or rights because the unborn person is 100% reliant on its mother and therefore her right has to superior to the unborn child because this fetus cannot perform one single task without the help of its