A popular objection is: if it is immoral to deprive someone of a future, or a "future similar to ours", then it is immoral to deprive a sperm or egg of a “future-like-ours”. Since it is immoral to deprive someone of a future, one must conclude that it is immoral to deprive a sperm or egg of a “future similar to ours.” This objection refers to various contraceptive methods, such as condoms and contraceptives. However, the biggest problem with the Marquis's argument that allowed this objection was his indecisiveness and improbability in drawing a definitive line. Marquis criticized pro-lifers and pro-choicers for not being able to have a definitive definition and made the same mistake in his own argument. One might object to his argument simply by asking where the decision would end; must we believe that when we use contraception we deprive a sperm or an egg of its future? Another important note is the idea that a “future like ours” is an even more ambiguous term than “person” or “human being.” It is impossible for the average individual to know which of her sperm or eggs carries a genetic abnormality that could cause her baby not to have a