The burglar analogy states that if someone is to leave their window open and a bugler was to enter the house, the burglar would have no right to stay. It is true that the burglar would have no right to stay in that situation, but the argument softens the choice made by the woman. Again, if a woman was to hit a red button, now with much greater chances of imprisoning someone in her basement, she would still be responsible for the person who ends up in her basement, dependant on her. The situation only increases the responsibility place on the woman, because consciously she made the decision to hit the button. This analogy also eliminates the unfair comparison that the fetus is a criminal purposely trying to invade the woman 's house, but instead was placed there because of the actions of the …show more content…
In this case, the mother is unable to provide for the child and therefore considers it right to abort to make it easier for her to simply provide for herself. The justification behind this usually comes from the idea that the baby, if born, will have a poor life so instead, the mother will make is easier for herself to provide her needs. There are some cases in which children are born and don 't have the resources to survive, so logically it would make some sense to prevent possible suffering. The problem for this is it robs the fetus of the potential values of life. The situation is similar to a lottery ticket. A lottery ticket may be worthless, in fact it probably will be useless, but it is unfair to destroy someone 's lottery ticket because it has worth. A lottery ticket in itself has value in potential value, hence why they can be sold for a price. If the lottery ticket had no potential value, then people wouldn 't buy them. In this same way, a person 's life is like a lottery ticket. Prematurely ending someone 's life steals all remaining potential value from the person. In this way, it is unfair to abort even if the mother is struggling to provide for the