Excuse me, where exactly is my bodily freedom in that instance? I need to go out of my way to do something with my body, just so someone else will live? We've concluded that that is wrong.

You’re not required to give the child any part of your body.

You’re misunderstanding what bodily autonomy means. By you argument, prisons should not exist.

Wikipedia defines bodily autonomy as:

> Bodily integrity is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy, self-ownership, and self-determination of human beings over their own bodies

I would say that part of having "self-determination of human beings over their bodies" is where their bodies are and what their bodies are doing.

But fine, we can just talk about tons of other laws which don't support the concept of bodily autonomy, like anti-drug laws, seat belt and helmet laws, etc.

> By you argument, prisons should not exist.

No, my argument is that bodily autonomy isn't a fully guaranteed concept in our legal system. A prison is exactly another example of the case, not only the main use of the prison, but also forced invasive strip searches there, forced blood draws, etc.

Arguing to dictionary definitions while absolutely refusing to put any good faith effort into your discussion is telling. Go do that somewhere else.

I was told I didn't understand a concept, so I went to the obvious place to get a primer on the subject. Do you have a better method I can learn about the rights of bodily autonomy in the US legal system?

I will state my point directly:

To me, arguing that a person has no obligation to care for an unborn human they created is no different than arguing that a person has no obligation to care for a 1 month old they created. I don't see the process of birth as some factor in determining whether someone is a human or not. Please note this is entirely separate from the concept of when someone is a human. I'm all for abortions of non-human-yet things should the mother be desirous.

> To me, arguing that a person has no obligation to care for an unborn human they created is no different than arguing that a person has no obligation to care for a 1 month old they created.

Except, in our society you do not have that obligation. Just leave them at the hospital.

Of course, you will have to create odd situations where this doesn't work to support your flawed argument, because you're a luddite and have a smol brain.

There are FUCKING ZERO situations outside of abortion where you can give up your care for the baby while pregnant, nevermind the many other differences where pregnancy is much more serious for the mother than having a 1mo old.

Are you seriously telling me you can't use whatever braincells you have left to come up with a few situations where a woman pregnant with a child and a born child are different? Really?