The authors differ in that Ms. Warren presented a legal argument and Mr. Marquis presented a moral argument. This is not to say that Ms. Warren didn't probe the moral implications of the subject but only as to clarify for whom our morals serve. Ms. Warren argued that an important step in finding a solution to the moral debate of abortion would be to define what we consider a "human person". She believes that "the …showed first 75 words of 551 total…

…showed last 75 words of 551 total…am more critical of his argument but I think it is because I think he avoids, by the use of "potential" life, the main argument of when life is begins; at conception or at birth. Because of this I am not swayed by his emotional argument. I agree much more in the concept Ms. Warren argues that defining the differences between the actual person and the potential person is necessary to accurately argue either position.