Why do pro-abortionists claim that tissue that does not share a woman's genetic code is part of her body?

If ou want to be technical, which I assume you do considering that you have stated a pseudo sceintific arguments.

A fetus does actually contain the womans genetic code, exacatly 50% or 23 chromasomes worth.

Secondly a fetus is actually parasitic by definition. It takes resources from the mother and does not actually contribute back.

I am pro choice becuase although it I do not agree with abortion I do recognize that there are circumstances by which I could not tell a woman that birthing a child of rape or incest is in her best interest.

Well, since "Lizz" said you apparently need a uterus to have a pro life position , the I'll answer...

It's a smokescreen argument to detract for the reality that yes, that is a human being, yes they are alive, and yes, abortion ends a life... any of those "my body my choice..." type of arguments simply distract us from what is the reality of the matter-abortion is murder.

You may not realize this, but there is a lot of tissue in your body that does not share your genetic code.

...a woman contributed half the DNA. Which doesn't mean the little zygote's aware of that, or of anything.

Your mitochondria don't have your DNA. They have their own.

Nonetheless, if someone took your mitochondria away, you'd sort of die immediately. You need those suckers.

i don't think of all and sundry ever did declare that a fetus grow to be an rather area of a female's physique. the alternative it particularly is suggested pertains to using her physique as vessel. additionally, I agree, u could have the means to sell a kidney or the different area of your physique.

yeah i agree,you never ask how are you 2 doing,you always say,how is the baby.

You claim feti are more important than women.