Ethics

Both these articles use logic to develop arguments as to why abortion should be illegal The pattern followed by each of these articles is the same, they discuss arguments by those speaking in favor of abortion and gradually tear them down. Also both these articles are centered around one major crux, which is different for each of them but leads to the same conclusion.

Article one-Sidney Callahans Abortion and the Sexual Agenda
Sidney Callahan describes herself as a pro-life feminist. An important argument that she makes is that giving birth to a child is incomparable to any other activity even if that activity involves giving life. Therefore any arguments that use examples of organ donations or dying violinists(Judith Marvis) should be excluded from the picture. Her other major point is that abortion is not a private matter between the mother and the fetus. If this were so why hold the husband or even the government responsible in any way for the child. Allowing abortion means the onus for raising the child is solely on the mother (since she has had it by choice) which actually means that women are being put at a disadvantage. Sidney Callahan also concludes that legalizing abortion would make abortions more frequent( by putting more responsibility on the mom) which would be very physically and emotionally traumatic.

Article Two-Don Marquis A Defense Against Abortion
Don Marquis build his argument using the Future Like Ours argument. The main crux of this argument is that a fetus has right to life because it has the potential to live. It basically means that the fetus could grow up and have a beautiful life and amazing experiences and by destroying it we would be depriving it of all that beauty and experience. Don Marquis also draws a question mark against the argument that the womens body is her own property by pointing out that a broken leg is not damaged property it is damage to self. Don Marquis however concludes that in certain scenarios abortion should be allowed. This could be if the fetus is a product of rape, within 14 days of conception, if the brain has not really developed or if the mother could die by having the baby.

Similarities between argumentspositions within the two papers
Both articles draw powerful arguments against abortion. An important similarity between both the articles is that each of them in its own way justify societal responsibility for preventing abortion even if they take different routes. Callahan by pointing out that society and the father should be responsible for the child if the mother is unable to manage and therefore should have say in what happens to the fetus. Marquis comes to the same path using the Future Like Ours. This argument also has a great deal of emotional appeal because it asks us that it is possible that we could have been the fetus which is being killed and never have gotten to live the life we did.

Differences between the argumentspositions within the two papers
An importance core difference between both articles is that Callahan bases her argument around the mother. Her basic implication is that legalizing abortion would eventually create a society which actually makes it harder for women to reach an equal social status to men, by implying that raising a child is the womens sole responsibility. However Marquis focuses on the fetus and how we are depriving it of a possibly amazing life.

Conclusion
Personally I find Sidney Callahans argument more powerful and rational. I feel that the value of a potential life is less then that of an actual life a point of view which breaks the base of Marquiss logic. Sidney Callahan however focuses on the women and how this concept of choosing which fets to save and which to kill will eventually back-fire on them.