Final answer:
Marquis suggests a new approach to the abortion debate is required due to the ongoing standoff between opposing sides with deeply entrenched values and beliefs. The debate's complexity is heightened by differing societal, religious, and political views, leading to logical fallacies in arguments and a need for reevaluation of advocacy strategies.
Step-by-step explanation:
Abortion Debate and New Strategies
Marquis argues that the abortion debate requires a new strategy because there is a standoff between the two sides of the debate. This ongoing debate has led to a situation where neither side is able to persuade the other, leading to a standoff.
The abortion issue is deeply divisive with both sides holding strong, often irreconcilable, values and beliefs. Tradition-minded conservatives, moral-progressives, and western libertarians have differing perspectives shaped by religious beliefs, stances on personal liberties, and views on the rights of women.
Anti-abortion advocates have shifted their strategy to state legislators after struggling to make progress at the national level.
However, the complexity of the debate, which involves deeply held views on personhood, rights, and morality, means that premises on both sides are often subject to scrutiny and fallacies like begging the question and strawman arguments. As such, the strategy needs reassessment in how it addresses the fundamental questions that define the debate.
The issue of public funds being used for abortion, the use of semantics in the debate, and contrasting surveys on public opinion all feed into the complexity of this issue.
Differences in social norms, governmental spending preferences, and individual values indicate that the abortion discussion extends beyond the legal realm and into the broader fabric of societal values and conflicts.
This rich tapestry of opinion and the historical shifts in public discourse underscore the need for new approaches in an attempt to resolve or better manage this ongoing debate.