The debate on abortion is fiery and difficult to elicit a thorough response. Don Marquis' argument fails to completely cover the aspects of murder, but his idea is impossible to ignore. Jane English's stance is less than convincing, and seems to use bizarre examples in a way to avoid being challenged. As opposed to arguing the morality of abortion, she needs to display a need for our society to allow abortion as a necessary lesser of two evils. Both arguments are weakened with concessions of allowable abortions, or for English's side, impermissible abortions, making each argument difficult to fully agree with.
             Although I agree with Marquis' view of the taking of a future as being part of the injury, I also feel that the pain of the act and knowledge that they are being killed is included. Murder is usually brutal, and unimaginably painful. This must be mentioned in the comparison to abortion as I feel it to be unlikely that most fetuses feel pain, and none have any idea that they are about to be killed. I think this is a small point, and his argument has a great deal of merit. His comparison shows the solid relationship of abortion to a crime and is for the most part, indisputable.
             I have a problem with English's essay due to the use of strange examples. In an example as odd and unrealistic as used, disproving is nearly impossible. She attempts to convey a feeling of concern for livelihood of the mother and her future, which will be drastically changed with the addition of a child to her life. Instead I felt that she would just confuse most people trying to figure out the point of her strange idea. Her one valid point is the fact that someone engages in an act with knowledge of the possible consequences, that they should not be punished and left helpless in the event that a child is conceived. Teenage sex seems to be an uncontrollable, instinctual act, one that has happened throughout time, and will not ...