Q Since my other question was so long, I will try to keep this one short! What do you find interesting and/or puzzling, agreeable and/or disagreeable, in the Thompson vs. Marquis articles? You don’t have to write about all those adjectives and both articles, but do say something about at least one specific passage in one of the articles. If you can come up with something, how do you think Kant would reply to either article? FYI: Thompson’s analogy of abortion to the violinist is very famous and many people think that at least one thing wrong with it is that in most cases of pregnancy, a woman made a free choice. So, the violinist analogy might work for cases of rape and incest, but not for failed birth control. But let’s bypass that pretty common objection. The point of Thompson’s argument is, even if the fetus is a full human being with a right to live in general, as is the violinist, that doesn’t mean the fetus or the violinist can claim someone else’s rights to liberty. Focus on whether this rights-based deontological argument can succeed.