Bodily Autonomy Contradicts Abortion

People who defend abortion commonly use an argument for it that emphasizes the concept of bodily autonomy, claiming that a pregnant woman has a right to control her own body and that aborting a fetus is within her rights, since the fetus is inside of her womb.  Sometimes this argument is even accompanied by charges of sexism against those who say it is immoral for a woman to have an abortion.  However, this issue has nothing to do with sexism in itself.

A simple reflection on what sexism is completely refutes this alleged connection between being anti-abortion and sexist.  Sexism encompasses regarding men and women as if they possess different metaphysical value, assuming that a person does or does not have certain psychological/personality characteristics or skills because they are a man or a woman, and discriminating against men and women in the workplace, family life, or any other dimension of human existence in a way beyond acknowledging anatomical and physiological differences.  Men and women have the same moral obligations, as actual feminism/egalitarianism affirms, and one of those obligations is to not unjustly extinguish human life.

Of course, generally speaking, men and women have a moral right to bodily autonomy--but there is no justification for using one's bodily autonomy to illicitly interfere with the that of others.  Abortion ironically deserves condemnation because of the very principle its very supporters affirm.  Despite often being used in fallacious arguments for abortion, bodily autonomy is actually incompatible with the stance that abortion is morally permissible, since abortion tramples over the right that unborn children have for bodily autonomy of their own.

Jane, a hypothetical woman, has the moral freedom to do whatever she wishes with her body as long as she does not use it in an immoral way, just like every actual woman does.  If she intentionally uses her body to physically harm another person against their will for any reason other than self-defense, military service during a just war, or the administration of a just legal penalty (i.e. just corporal punishment), no one can legitimately claim that she is only exercising her bodily autonomy and that it is immoral to condemn her behavior.  The only way that a person could argue for abortion on the grounds of bodily autonomy and consistently uphold that idea is to oppose any restrictions on how a woman uses her body to harm or kill others.

Bodily autonomy contradicts the notion that abortion is not immoral; it does not support it in any way whatsoever.  It couldn't!  If a person does not have the right to murder, then it does not matter if the victim is located inside the body of another human being (or if the perpetrator is a woman).  The location, appearance, and size of a human do not dictate whether or not he or she has human rights.  If human rights exist, then simply being a human at any stage of biological development means that one has them.  Nothing more is necessary to possess each of those rights.