(6a) Summarize Don Marquis’ pro-life argument in Why Abortion is Immoral. In Don Marquis pro-life argument, he argues pro-life from a secular point of view instead of the normal religious view. In making this argument, he presents the views of the pro-abortionist and the anti-abortionist. He describes that most anti-abortionist make their moral argument on too broad of an approach as it pertains to taking human life (Marquis 347). He argues the proabortionist argument for abortion narrows the view of what killing actually is. The author makes the moral point to compare the two positions by arguing that the loss of one’s life is the greatest loss one can suffer. He argues that all of the losses that an individual suffers when they loss their life, thus making the loss of the life immoral. It is based on the future like our argument that he argues abortion is immoral. (6b) Summarize Judith Jarvis Thomson’s pro-choice argument in A Defense of Abortion. In Judith Jarvis Thomson’s Pro-choice argument, she argues for the pro-choice movement. Thomson’s uses various analogies and example to make her argument for abortion being a moral act. In making her argument for the abortion, she acknowledges that anti abortionist’s argument is based on the fetus being a human being at the moment of conception. She makes it clear that she does not hold the argument of pro-life activist of the fetus being a human being at conception as a strong enough argument to be against abortion. In her argument, she concedes that by the tenth week the fetus is a human being based on the development of body parts. She does not agree however with the notion of a fetus being a person at the moment of conception. Ultimately for argument’s sake she goes with the argument that life is conceived at conception in an effort to make her argument for abortion. Her argument is for the right of a person being able to decide what happens to their body over the right of someone to have life. She uses an example of someone being kidnapped and plugged into someone for nine months to save their life. She discusses abortion and rape situations. She discusses the right of mother’s life that could die from childbirth versus the life of the unborn child. Thomson views situation such as the potential of a mother losing her life over childbirth as moral reason for mothers to abort their child (Thomson). She discusses the right to life argument. She indicates that having a right to life does not guarantee having either a right to be given or being allowed to continue use someone’s else body (Thomson, 341). She furthers her argument on the basis that taking away someone else right for someone else is unjust. In other words, to deprive a woman of the right to use her body the way she wants would be an unjust cause. (6c) Which argument do you find more convincing? Why? In reading and studying both individual’s writings both made some compelling arguments to support their position for and against abortion. Both authors did not have any fear addressing areas that their opposition used to support their case. However, based on the content and the arguments made by Don Marquis were the most persuasive of the two individuals. Marquis argument was the most logical and sound argument compared to the argument of Thomson. The arguments made by Thomson were not realistic argument. Her argument basically calls for one to disregard a life merely out of selfish behavior. While it is true that she gave many examples to express her point of view, the examples she gave were not realistic and the fact that indicates that a fetus is human contradicts her whole argument. If murder is immoral, how can taking the life of a baby be moral? Marquis argument is more logical of the two because it emphasizes the importance of allowing an individual to live. He does a better job of providing support of his anti-abortion view. He does while presenting both sides of the argument and taking the religious nature out of the argument. Marqueis shows throughout his work why killing is wrong and immoral and how killing also applies to the fetus. Marquesis is short describes a fetus as no different than adult human being and taking the life of fetus is taking away the fetus future and experience which is comparable to taking the future of an adult being. Works Cited Marquis, Don’. "Why Abortion is Immoral." Shafer-Landau, Russ. The Elthical Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. 346-356. Thomson, Judith Jarvis. "A Defense of Abortion." Shafer-Landau, Russ. The Elthical Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. 333-345. 11. (a) Summarize Louis P. Pojman’s argument in The Case against Affirmative Action. The author argues against Affirmative Action by arguing against the main arguments used to justify Affirmative Action. He starts the argument against Affirmative Action on the notion that roles models are important but role models do not have to a person that is of one’s same ethnically. In describing affirmative action, he describes it as an unfair hiring practice. It is described as a practice where reverse discrimination is practiced by the hiring body because the individual hired is hired based on their racial status instead of their qualification (Pojman 419). To demonstrate one of the issues of affirmative action, the author cites a widespread rumor in the medical field concerning Black doctors under 40. He also notes how Affirmative Action causes a stigma of the position being undeserved regardless if it is true or not. The Author conveys that Affirmative Action is not needed in US because it discriminates non blacks and it places nonqualified people in a position that should be held by qualified individuals. The author concedes that White males are innocent beneficiaries of unjust discrimination (Pojman 421). The author concludes that despite the benefit that white males receives, they should not have to pay for the sins that were committed by their ancestors (Pojman 422). The author’s argues against the diversity argument of Affirmative action. The author does not view hiring for diversity reasons to assist in understanding a race culture as a reasoning for affirmative action. The author argues against the Equal Results argument. He indicates that no can determine what the representation of each racial group would be in a just society (425). The author indicates in his argument that affirmative action effectively discriminates against young white males because it judges them by their race instead of merit (428). (11b) Do you find the argument persuasive? Why or why not? I did not find this argument persuasive. The author clearly is out of touch with regards to racism in America. The history of America has not been too kind to African Americans and Pojman’s argument as to why Affirmative is wrong fails to convince me why affirmative action is not needed. In one of his arguments, Pojman says the following: “fight the feeling how I will, I cannot help wondering on seeing a Black or woman in a position of honor, "Is she in this position because she merits it or because of Affirmative Action?" Where Affirmative Action is the policy, the "figment of pigment" creates a stigma of undeserved ness, whether or not it is deserved (419). This statement by the author shows the ultimate level of hypocrisy. The author is trying to persuade the reader that if a black person is successful on a job, people may question whether or not it is a result of affirmative action. While the author does indicate that the questioning is unfair, it is rather hypocritical when one examines the systematic racism that African American have faced in the United States. The author fails to compare the notion of whether the person being questioned is qualified or not is similar to the multitude of white men and women that are hire for positions but fail to have the same credentials as African Americans. One of the major stories in the sports world today is about the lack of African American coaches and general managers in the National Football League yet the league consists of 77% African American players. The author also argues about compensation to make his cause. He indicates that reverse racism is happening when blacks have been compensated by whites for the wrongs that have been done to them in the past (419). The author addresses how other races have received some type of compensation from American for social ills commented against them such as the Japanese Americans during WWII (420). The author tries to paint the picture that Blacks were not harmed by the US government as a whole but a result of private discrimination (420). It is clear from this writing that the author is ignoring the history of America and Blacks to try convey his argument against Affirmative Action. Without accurately presently the entire facts of the history of America as a nation and its legislation and encouragement of racism in the past, this author point of view cannot be taken seriously and is not persuasive. Furthermore, the morally correct thing to do when one knows that a group has been wronged by another group is to provide some type of retribution to the damaged party. The author fails to make a logical convincing argument as to why there should be no affirmative action. He failed to present all of the arguments for affirmative action and left out many of the travesties that have committed toward African Americans that have been designed to hold them back in society. Works Cited Pojman, Louis P. "The Case Against Affirmative Action." Shafer-Landau, Russ. The Elthical Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. 346-356.