In my opinion Marchese's argument on why abortion is morally wrong has a couple of flaws, it is biased towards the fetus and makes some unreasonable assumptions. Specifically, the Marquis's account of why killing an adult human is wrong has the potential to lead to some controversial conclusions. Marchese also does not consider any consequences on the life of the potential parents of the fetus. Due to the nature of the topic of abortion, it really only applies to women who are considering abortion, and as such, we cannot make the standard assumptions that we will have with normal fetuses. In this essay I will explain the Marquis's argument and try to demonstrate that his argument cannot conclude that abortion is morally wrong. Marchese has a different approach to the topic of abortion than most other people, he does not try to establish that the fetus is a person, but instead tries to establish a reason why killing us is wrong, and demonstrate that the reason also applies to to fetuses; and so, however, the future argument like ours has a lot of trouble handling cases where killing the subject would obviously be wrong. For example, imagine that there is a person who will die naturally in the next instant; they have no future. Or a person who currently doesn't value their future and never will. Suppose you know those facts and those people are in front of you. It seems that the future-like-ours argument would come to the conclusion that it would not be morally wrong at all to kill those people because they either have no future, or will never come to find value in their future. . This obviously doesn't seem like the right conclusion, since common sense should tell us that it would be extremely wrong to kill those people. This shows that the argument from a future similar to ours is wrong, and consequently so is Marchese's argument against it