Don Marquis Abortion

Words: 1204
Pages: 5

When it comes to the ethics of killing, Don Marquis presents a unique position that differs from the typical arguments centered around personhood or the qualities that determine moral status. Marquis believes that killing is wrong not because of its effects on the killer or the effects on those in the victim’s life, but rather its impact on the victim’s future (Marquis 1989, 189). This paper aims to evaluate his argument based on the deprivation of potential future experiences, particularly in the context of abortion, where the ethics of abortion are weighed against the fetus’s potential future deprivation. To frame his argument as to why killing is wrong, Marquis first addresses possible counterarguments. He states that some might believe …show more content…
His argument against abortion does not rely on the specific characteristics of a person, such as their level of consciousness, their social roles/status, or their capacity for relationships. One of the main strengths lies in its uniqueness, which appeals to the future possibilities prohibited by abortion, rather than getting tangled up in the complexities of determining when life begins or what a “person” is. This allows his view to be applied broadly, encompassing not just humans, but all members of the species Homo sapiens, emphasizing a shared potential for a valued future. (Marquis 1989, 190-192) Additionally, this view can explain why humans think killing is such a terrible thing, which is because they are deprived of the rest of their lives. It resonates with a universally recognized sense of loss, particularly in the premature end of young lives often described with sentiments like “they had so much left ahead of them” or “they had so much potential,” indicating that we think killing is so terrible due to the fact the victim failed to live out their …show more content…
This line of reasoning provides a defense against claims that this argument fails to consider the competing futures of the mother and fetus. However, no matter which way you look at it, this aspect of his argument is circular and continues to go back to the application of what is considered “valuable.” In this sense, we would be stuck in a position of weighing futures, a task tainted with personal bias, signifying an immense weakness in his argument. Furthermore, since the concern is that the immorality of abortion is grounded in the deprivation of a valuable future, then a similar argument could be made about contraception since it prevents the existence of a potential future. Thus, if preventing a valuable future is wrong, then contraception could be deemed wrong for the same reason. This extension brings about another quandary in which there is fogginess in where and how we make a distinction between actions that prevent life and those that end life. Overall, Don Marquis’s argument against abortion, grounded in the wrongness of depriving an individual of a valuable future, exhibits a compelling argument regarding the ethics of