Marquis - Why Abortion is Immoral

Overview

• The article "Why Abortion is Immoral" by Don Marquis argues against the permissibility of abortion, positing that it is morally wrong under most circumstances, equivalent to killing an innocent adult human.

Philosophical Context

• Marquis addresses the lack of support for the view that abortion is generally immoral in contemporary philosophical discourse.

• He critiques common beliefs held by secular philosophers that anti-abortion stances stem from irrational religious beliefs or flawed philosophical reasoning.

• He aims to demonstrate that strong moral objections against abortion exist and are worth considering.

Key Premises of the Argument

1. Major Assumption: The essay is based on the assumption that whether abortion is permissible hinges on whether a fetus is a being whose life it is morally wrong to take.

2. Neglected Cases: Marquis deliberately sets aside specific cases like early pregnancy abortions or those where the mother’s life is at risk.

Symmetries Between Anti-Abortion and Pro-Choice Arguments

• Anti-Abortion Arguments: Common claims include:

  • Life begins at conception.

  • Fetuses resemble babies and possess essential human genetic codes.

• Pro-Choice Arguments: Common claims include:

  • Fetuses are not persons or rational agents.

  • The morality of killing only applies to members of the human community.

• Both sides feel their positions are intuitive and self-evident, leading to a lack of persuasion on either side.

Standoffs and Moral Principles

• Both groups leverage overarching moral principles to support their claims:

  • Anti-Abortionist Principle: Taking a human life is inherently wrong.

  • Pro-Choicer Principle: Only beings with personhood have rights to life.

• These principles lead to reciprocal accusations of being too broad or too narrow, causing an impasse.

The Nature of the Argument

• Marquis suggests that both sides' issues arise from needing to connect specific characteristics of fetuses to moral obligations surrounding life.

• Anti-abortionists often misuse the broad scope of their principles, leading to counterexamples that undermine their arguments.

• Pro-choice advocates face challenges defining the criteria for personhood without invoking arbitrary distinctions.

A Theory of Killing

• Marquis proposes that killing is fundamentally wrong because it deprives the victim of experiences, activities, and future prospects.

• This concept applies not only to adults but also to fetuses, arguing that abortion deprives them of a valuable future.

Evaluation of Arguments Against Abortion

1. Value of a Future: Marquis asserts that the loss of future value is the core reason killing is wrong.

   • This applies equally to fetuses as it does to adults; hence abortion is morally wrong.

2. Critique of Competing Views: He discusses alternatives (like desire-based theories) that fail to adequately capture why killing is wrong in the context of abortion.

Implications of Marquis' Argument

• The conclusion states that abortion is prima facie seriously morally wrong due to the loss of a fetus's future.

• While it acknowledges that there could be rare exceptions in which abortion might be morally permissible, these cases would be exceptional.

• Marquis emphasizes that the argument is independent from the labels of personhood, thereby sidestepping common controversial definitions.

Concluding Remarks

• Marquis argues for a rational understanding of the ethics of abortion based on the value of a future like ours, proposing that this perspective reconciles various standing moral intuitions about killing across different human scenarios.