In his article “Abortion and Infanticide”, Michael Tooley offers an extreme, pro-choice argument that abortion is morally permissible at any time. According to Tooley, a fetus lacks a right to life throughout an entire pregnancy. In addition, after birth there is a period of time in which an infant lacks a right to life as well. Infanticide is morally permissible if nobody wants to raise the infant who has recently been born. Tooley believes that it is a requirement that we must desire life in order to have a right to live. He offers only a few exceptions, including: indoctrination, suicidal depression, and temporary unconsciousness. Tooley supports his argument with various premises, but ultimately backs his case with the fact that self-consciousness is necessary to having the right to life. Tooley argues that there is a strong connection between the rights that we have as individuals and the desires we possess. Simply stated, rights secure for individuals the things that they desire. For example, as individuals we desire life, liberty and happiness. Our very own Declaration of Independence states that we have “a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” There can’t be a more clear-cut example to demonstrate Tooley’s connection between rights and desires. If an individual desires something, then as other individuals we have an obligation not to deprive them of it. However, only those who have experiences and other mental states are capable of having desires. Also, if you have a desire for something, you have to have an understanding of what that thing is. This brings up the concept of self-consciousness that is central to Tooley’s argument. An individual must not only have the capacity to have experiences, but they must have self-consciousness, or the awareness of their own existence and the awareness of those experiences. Self-consciousness is not