The argument of "my body, my choice" is a good argument for abortion.

• Burden of Proof lays on the Instigation which has been satisfied.
  
• Voters shall note that proper definitions have not been established so I, the Opposition, shall establish such that I find is impartial and factual. 
  

"2a: the organized physical substance of an animal or plant either living or dead

She has a muscular body.

body parts

normal body temperature

: such as

(1): the material part or nature of a human being

when the soul leaves the body

(2): a dead organism : CORPSE

The body was shipped home for burial.

b: a human being : PERSON

What's a body to do?"

"2: power of choosing : OPTION

you have no choice"

"My body, my choice is a feminist slogan used in several countries, most often surrounding issues of bodily autonomy and abortion.
Feminists usually defend an individual's right of self-determination over their bodies for sexual, marriage and reproductive choices as rights." 

1. BODILY AUTONOMY
   

"The argument of "my body, my choice" posits that one's body is their own, and thus it is just to do as they see fit with their body. As having an abortion is a choice you make for your body, the argument states that abortions are moral because one should have a choice over what they do with their own body and abortions are one of those things. The "my body, my choice" argument posits that the basis of morality for abortion is the fact that one's body should always be their choice for what to do with it and thus abortions are under this umbrella of doing what you want with your body always being moral."

 "However, if it is always moral to do what you want with your body under this argument, if something that you want to do with your body is immoral, then the argument of "my body, my choice" cannot be true. Put in another way, if I can prove that something that you do with your body that is your choice is immoral, I can also prove that the "my body, my choice" argument is a poor argument."

“Bodily autonomy is defined as the right to make decisions about your own body, life, and future, without coercion or violence.”

"The issue with this argument is that it is not always moral to do whatever one wants with their body. For instance, suppose a suicidal person wants to end their own life. Under the "my body, my choice argument", they should be allowed to commit suicide because it's their body and their choice to kill themselves. In another instance, suppose someone doesn't want to wear a seatbelt. Under the "my body, my choice" argument, as long as they aren't endangering anyone else with their lack of seatbelt wearing and only themselves, it should be their body and their choice to not wear a seatbelt."

"But the reality is that suicide is seldom the product of cool-headed deliberation, the so-called ‘rational suicide’, but mostly an act of uncontrollable anguish and despair.

For instance, if an intelligent person suffers a head injury that reduces her mental state to that of a contented infant, this should be considered a serious evil even if the person herself (in her current condition) is oblivious to her fate."

Pro-choice doesn't automatically equate to being "pro-abortion" and that distinction must be made-- one could be theoretically against abortions yet would be pro-choice. The same cannot be said for those who're pro-life whom must solely be against abortions. This expresses the fact that abortion can be perceived as moral or immoral yet still be a choice for women who desire to take control of their lives so to secure their physical, mental, and financial health. 

"The argument of "my body, my choice" posits that one's body is their own, and thus it is just to do as they see fit with their body. As having an abortion is a choice you make for your body, the argument states that abortions are moral because one should have a choice over what they do with their own body and abortions are one of those things. The "my body, my choice" argument posits that the basis of morality for abortion is the fact that one's body should always be their choice for what to do with it and thus abortions are under this umbrella of doing what you want with your body always being moral." 

However, one must acknowledge that it is every human being’s right to control their own physical being.

The true semantic of this line: “My body, my choice” produces the argument that women should see it fit what benefits their families and their physical, mental, and financial health-- most especially the bodily autonomy of women.

Suicide itself is inherently immoral and is widely regarded in society as such due to its harmful effects it has on the individual. And in reference to what Burton stated, those with thoughts of suicide are impeded by their emotions in their ability to rationalize and think reasonably. They are thus unfit to make the rightful decision to commit suicide due to their mental state and importantly due to the immorality of suicide. The morality of suicide does not equate to that of abortion.

To not wear your seatbelt is hazardous to one's health, same with suicide. Abortion does not which justifies the usage of "My Body, My Choice" as a good argument. "My body, my choice" struggles for a woman's right to fight for their health-- to safeguard abortion is to allow women to be able to be given the opportunity to stay physically, mentally, and financially healthy. Suicide and not wearing seatbelts does not relate to such a statement. The morality of abortion is crucially more important in today's society than what apparent morality can be found in not wearing seatbelts or suicide. 

• As aforementioned by @Intelligence_06 in the comments, readers and voters must note that individual interpretations of the debate prompt were made that were different from one another. I fail to see how this could call for concluding the debate or for either of us to forfeit so, for the sake of progress, I'll happily continue this discussion. Thank you to @Intelligence_06 for your insight.
  

Questions. . .

You say that this is an important distinction to make, but I fail to see why. This debate details whether or not the argument of "my body, my choice" is a good argument for abortion. Considering that, if abortion is seen as moral or immoral yet still be a choice for women, why does it matter? I fail to see how this is a distinction which relates to the debate. 

Notes: 

Your definition of my body, my choice is as follows. . .

I would like to note that this definition does not say that "my body, my choice" solely refers to issues of bodily autonomy and abortion. It says it most often does, and later goes on to say that it usually is used to defend an individuals rights of self-determination over their bodies for sexual, marriage and reproductive choices, but never does it concretely say that those are the only things that "my body, my choice" refers to. In other words, this definition could include the idea that suicide is moral as it's one's body and therefor one's choice to commit suicide. 

Pro-choice doesn't automatically equate to being "pro-abortion" and that distinction must be made-- one could be theoretically against abortions yet would be pro-choice. The same cannot be said for those who're pro-life whom must solely be against abortions. This expresses the fact that abortion can be perceived as moral or immoral yet still be a choice for women who desire to take control of their lives so to secure their physical, mental, and financial health. 

Contentions/Refutations:

You quote a spire article and in that quote was the following. . . 

The quote says that it is every human being's right to control their own physical being, but doesn't specify a limit to that control based on whether or not they are harming themselves. This idea supports the fact that people should be allowed to commit suicide when they so please, as that would be included on controlling one's own physical being. As covered previously, that definition would support the line of reasoning that "my body, my choice" is a poor argument for abortion as it is clearly morally wrong to allow people to kill themselves. 

Another thing that you mention is. . . 

I agree with you on saying that suicide is inherently immoral, and also that the morality of suicide does not equate to that of abortion. That said, both of those things support my argument. If suicide is inherently immoral, and furthermore their moralities are not equivalent, that just more goes to show that "my body, my choice" is a a bad argument. After all, "my body, my choice" argues for the support of suicide being moral, as stated previously. If suicide is inherently immoral, the only logical conclusion is that the argument of "my body, my choice" is flawed. 

Another refutation that you make is. . . 

It is true that suicide and not wearing seatbelts doesn't relate to the statement that "my body, my choice" argues that women should be given the opportunity of abortion. However, the argument that women should be given the opportunity of abortion isn't the only argument made by "my body, my choice". As stated previously, it also argues that suicide is moral. 

I, the Opposition, was interpreting the prompt where it focused solely on the abortion debate (as that is where its origin lay)-- and to be more precise, this is how it should be interpreted as. Even with the ambiguity of it being used for other topics such as suicide, etc., that does not discount its integral value in a debate where it does summarize the true intentions of the pro-choice movement

Pro-choice doesn't automatically equate to being "pro-abortion" and that distinction must be made-- one could be theoretically against abortions yet would be pro-choice. The same cannot be said for those who're pro-life whom must solely be against abortions. This expresses the fact that abortion can be perceived as moral or immoral yet still be a choice for women who desire to take control of their lives so to secure their physical, mental, and financial health. 

Voters, readers, and the Instigation alike must note that I was interpreting the debate prompt on how it would (or not) be a good argument against the pro-life movement alone. The purpose of the above quote was to display how "My Body, My Choice" expresses how the pro-choice movement isn't denying the political right from not doing an abortion and convincing others (not coercing) to do the same. Neither is it trying to support the supposition that pro-choice is, in fact, "pro-abortion". Therefore, because of its inherent neutrality where both pro-abortion and anti-abortion acolytes can equally support such a slogan, "My Body, My Choice" is a remarkably great argument point.

The types of interpretation of "My Body, My Choice" is something I cannot control and neither do I want to. But voters, readers, and the like, the Opposition would like to connect this to another worldwide slogan that has also rallied its own controversy: Black Lives Matter. There are political right demonstrations who have used this slogan and interpreted it to mean that the Black Lives Matter movement is stating only black lives matter. This has sprung the apparent opposing slogan of All Lives Matter to arise and its controversy continues to resume itself.  

Which brings the Opposition to say this that the semantics of the slogan "My Body, My Choice" and alternatively, "Black Lives Matter" shouldn't deviate from its true intentions. To misinterpret "My Body, My Choice" through a literal meaning so to signify that the right to commit suicide or other mundane trivialities (like whether to have the right to pick your nose, eat it, or wearing seatbelts) is justified as well, fails to capture the true intention of the slogan and alternatively allows more despicable characters to delegitimatize movements that were intended and are trying to fight for good. And, once more, the ambiguity of this statement and its multi-faceted interpretations of it doesn't necessarily negate the effectiveness of "My Body, My Choice" as an arguing point. 

Yes, the claim of "my body, my choice" should be interpreted solely for the purposes of abortion, although the basis shouldn't. The problem doesn't lay within that interpretation, but rather the implications of that interpretation.

Let's break down what "my body, my choice" means, in my opinion. I believe that it means that one should be allowed to get an abortion on the basis that a persons body should always be their choice for what they do with it.

Suppose, however, that we interpret an alternative definition. Let's have this definition be fully limited to abortion, and would directly not include anything outside it. It would look something like this: "One's body should be their choice to as they please regarding abortion on the basis that one's body should always be their choice regarding abortion". The issue with this definition is that the basis for abortion being moral is that abortion is moral, yet it fails to explain why that would be so. In my original definition, the basis for abortion being moral is that one's body should always be one's choice.

As I understand it, what you mean by this is that "my body, my choice" is a good argument because it doesn't force others to have an abortion or convincing others to get an abortion. Rather instead, it simply highlights the idea that people should have the right to make their own choices about whether or not they get an abortion. As I understand it, you then further claim that this idea is fully neutral, as the pro-choice side will agree with the idea that one should have a choice in whether or not they get an abortion and the pro-life side will support the idea that people should get the opportunity to choose whether not to have an abortion without someone pushing them towards abortion. You then claim that because of this neutrality and the fact that everyone can use the slogan it is a good argument point. 

However, whether or not the argument is neutral and can be used by both sides is completely irrelevant to whether or not the argument is good. I fail to see how neutrality somehow makes the argument better. In this case, as you said in the same paragraph, "I was interpreting the debate prompt on how it would (or not) be a good argument against the pro-life movement alone." If you were comparing it against the pro-life movement alone, why does it matter that pro-life can also use it as an argument? After all, the prompt is "The argument of 'my body, my choice' is a good argument for abortion", which wouldn't include it being used as a pro-life argument for the purposes of this debate. 

Let's look at some of the possible interpretations for Black Lives Matter. Firstly, "Black lives matter because all lives matter, which includes black lives". This explanation makes logical sense as an argument. It also holds up from a moral perspective, as it is obviously morally correct that all lives matter. Now, let's look at an alternative, "Black lives matter because black lives matter". 

Clearly, this is a poor argument because it uses the claim as evidence. To reuse an example I used earlier, it is like saying that the Earth is flat because the Earth is flat. Next, let's look at some of the possible interpretations of "my body, my choice". Though I have done this already previously, I'll restate it here for clarity. Firstly, "one should be allowed to get an abortion on the basis that a persons body should always be their choice for what they do with it". From an argument perspective, this makes logical sense. It posits that the basis for morality in abortion is that one's body should always be their choice. The issue with this is that the argument doesn't hold up from a moral perspective. If one's body is always their choice to with as they so please,  then suicide should also logically be something that they can morally do. Let's try another definition, then, again this is one I used earlier, "One's body should be their choice to as they please regarding abortion on the basis that one's body should always be their choice regarding abortion".  This argument is not sound. The evidence is itself the claim, in much the same way the flat earth argument I used earlier was.