Mandatory Prompt One: Discussion of Don Marquis' Future Like Ours argument for the prima facie wrongness of abortion. For this first, mandatory prompt, contribute to a critical discussion of Don Marquis' Future Like Ours argument for the prima facie wrongness of abortion. This prompt is mandatory in the sense that at least one of your posts has to contribute to the discuss of it. Contributing to the discussion means making a post that addresses the argument directly, or responds to a peer's comments on the argument. At the risk of simplifying, there are two basic stances we could take toward the argument: defending it and objecting to it. So, suppose a peer objects to P2 of the argument. You could defend P2 by explaining why you think their objection fails (e.g. because it rests on a misunderstanding of the premise, appeals to something false or is logically irrelevant to the truth of P2). If you object to the argument, be sure to focus your objections on the truth of a premise! Do not just object to the conclusion without telling us why the argument fails! Marquis argument* is logically valid. Remember what that means: if you deny the argument's conclusion about the moral status of abortion, you are logically committed to the denial of at least one of its premises.