John Marquis On Abortion

Marquis argues that killing a fetus deprives it of a valuable future/future like ours, and concludes by saying abortion is not morally permissible. I agree with Marquis’s argument that it is wrong to kill a fetus through abortion because I believe that they have a valuable future as all humans do. Abortion is defined as the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, which is most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy. (dictionary.com) Furthermore I do agree with Marquis that majority of deliberate abortions are seriously immoral, however I do believe that in some cases it is permissible, for instance choosing to have an abortion after being sexually assaulted or due to life threatening circumstances. Being that the loss …show more content…
The idea behind this argument is that when a couple uses contraception, for instance a condom, that they are depriving the child that would have been born of a valuable future. One might also continue to argue then that masturbation and abstinence are considered morally wrong since they are both depriving a child’s possible valuable future. Contraception is the deliberate use of artificial methods or other techniques to prevent pregnancy or a new life as a consequence of sexual intercourse. (dictionary.com) Different forms of contraception include some birth control pills, the morning after/Plan B pill, IUDs and more. Those who argue against Marquis believe that contraception is ultimately unnatural, anti-life and that it is a form of abortion. Furthermore they believe that those who use contraception have bad intentions because they are intentionally engaged in an "anti-life" act where they intend to prevent a new life from being born, therefore depriving it of its future …show more content…
One might begin to argue by saying that if it is wrong to abort, then the fetus must have a moral status, however only beings who can personally care for their interests have a moral status. Then they conclude that since fetuses can not care for their own interests being that they are incapable, that it is not wrong to abort a fetus.
This objections fails to succeed because the argument is unsound. This objection to Marquis’s argument confuses having interests versus having the ability to take an interest in one's own interests. For instance the difference between an unconscious patient and a comatose patient. It may be argued if fetuses have the ability to take an interest in their interests, but at best, they do have the future ability to take an interest in their interests. Marquis argues you cannot have a right to life unless it expressly desires its own continued existence; as fetuses do not value in such a way. He argues that just because a being does not currently value or desire something, it does not follow that that thing is not valuable to, or desirable for, the