I don't really have a position on abortion, but I don't like this point at all. It says too much, I think.

Imagine there's a genocide in North Korea. I'm not North Korean, I'm not friends with anyone from North Korea. Does accepting this point mean that I have to accept that genocide in North Korea is none of my business and is above my criticism? And, if not, what distinguishes the two?

Should Biden not sign a pro-choice bill because he lacks a uterus and therefore is forbidden from taking a side?

"Personally, I believe that women (and men, for that matter) should have control over their bodies. Full stop."

I believe that should be enough information to answer your question, unless you somehow believe that being mass-murdered is the same thing as having control over one's own body.

No. Because what you (or I, for that matter) want or believe is only relevant for our own bodies.

What happens to the bodies of others is up to those others. No one, other than the owner of that body, has anything to say about what happens to their body.

But I ruled it out confidently: The situation where a bunch of people are weighing in on a specific abortion is not one that really comes up, whereas people discuss abortion in general nonstop. You had just said that you aren't opposed to the other potential parent and medical professionals having input in a specific abortion. It doesn't make any sense to phrase that idea that way- having a functional uterus has no bearing on whether you're the one who is considering an abortion. And the other reply also interpreted you as saying men shouldn't comment on the issue and went uncorrected. Taken together, I thought there was no way that was what you meant and I was being excessively charitable.

I misunderstood, but I think you could have been clearer.

I'm not sure how you can make that statement seriously. The only situation where one might want or need to consider terminating a pregnancy is if you have a functional female reproductive system.

Each individual should make those decisions for themselves without a bunch of busybodies telling them what they should do with their own bodies.

As for potential fathers and medical professionals, their opinions may be useful to the person considering such a procedure, but it isn't their body and, as such, that's an advisory situation at most.

>And the other reply also interpreted you as saying men shouldn't comment on the issue and went uncorrected.

Which doesn't make a lot of sense, since I (as a male) was, in fact, commenting on the issue. Or did you miss that part?

People should absolutely be able to express their opinions.

However, when it comes to a specific person considering a specific procedure (whether that be a pregnancy termination, a haircut or removal of a hangnail), the decision necessarily should be that of the specific person involved, and the opinions of others aren't at all relevant.

That's my point. If you can and/or do become pregnant, then the decision whether to terminate or not is yours alone -- but only for your own body.

If you don't have a functional female reproductive system, such decisions are irrelevant to you. If you do have a functional female reproductive system, how that system is used (or not) is completely up to the individual involved and no one should have any decision making power over how another person's body is used.

Feel free to disagree with my position and make your opinions clear. But when it comes to a specific person making a specific decision about their own body, you have no say unless it's your body.

>I misunderstood, but I think you could have been clearer.

That's entirely likely. I tried to elucidate my point. If I failed to do so, my apologies. I attempted to do so again in this comment. I hope I was clearer this time.