Marquis Arguments Against Abortion

In philosophical literature, Marquis argued that abortion was/is immoral, except only in rare exceptions, but more importantly he noted that prochoice and anti-abortion arguments cannot be symmetric thus making discussion on the topic quite a conundrum. Marquis purported the arguments of anti-abortionist, who asserted and believed that life is present at or from the moment of conception, and that fetuses look like babies, possess genetic code, and are therefore in possession of the qualities and attributes of being humans. While pro-choicers typically assert that fetuses are not persons as they are not rational agents or social beings. Marquis did however exclaim that anti- abortionist and pro-choicers arguments/beliefs exhibit two similarities,
It is only once the determination is made that it can be purported that any moral characteristic can yield a preponderance of evidence that there is any obligation or lack thereof as it pertains to a life (of a fetus) being saved. Marquis exclaimed that while, both the anti-abortionist and pro-choicers claims do seem to be accurate and true, being that "it looks like a baby" claim sets forth a more difficult fact to establish earlier in the pregnancy, this is where he (Marquis) believed it led to a standoff. He asserted that anti-abortionist contentions tend to be far too broad with “boundaries” in regards to what qualifies as a human life, and thus allows for the interpretation that eradication of any human cell is morally questionable/wrong. In contrast the pro-choicer Marquis argues establishes “qualifications” for human life that are for too specific (narrowed down) and thus does not account the immorality of killing infants and/or
Marquis stated in his writing “Clearly, it is wrong to kill adult human beings. Clearly, it is not wrong to end the life of some arbitrarily chosen single human cell. Fetuses seem to be like arbitrarily chosen human cells in some respects and like adult humans in other respects.” (Wolff pg. 361). Marquis thus suggest that a proper contention for an anti-abortionist (Value of the future account) must be founded on the theory that if someone is not afforded the ‘opportunity’ to experience certain gains or projects due to the negligence/actions of others then whomever is responsible for the loss of that person’s life is in fact morally