[prolepunk]

> Your inflammatory pseudo-counter-argument doesn't change the fact that abortion in cases of non-life-threatening births remains morally problematic.

Says the person who has the need to argue about what women can and can't do with their bodies while not having a uterus himself.

[dvt]

As a trained philosopher, I'm inclined to be as charitable as possible, and even though you make a valid point, yours is quite a weak argument. For example, I'm not a soldier, but I can still posit that engaging in combat with non-military civilians is not morally justifiable.

I can make these kinds of arguments by analogy or generalization. So I hope you can see how (and more importantly why) we can think about morally-difficult problems like abortion even though we're not women, war even though we're not soldiers, etc.