It’s not your body, AOC. An unborn child is its own body.

have made no secret of my admi­ra­tion for Alexan­dria Oca­sio-Cortez. That said, I must point out how wrong she is to res­ur­rect, in the wake of the Geor­gia and Alaba­ma abor­tion laws, the tired old “my body, my choice” rhetoric. AOC did this on Twit­ter, a place she fre­quents almost as much as the Dear Leader him­self. I sup­port her choice in this.

Now, it is worth not­ing here that even Christo­pher Hitchens, athe­ist and abor­tion rights advo­cate, reject­ed this argu­ment in its favor. Here he is in God is Not Great:

As a mate­ri­al­ist, I think it has been demon­strat­ed that an embryo is a sep­a­rate body and enti­ty, and not mere­ly (as some real­ly did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be fem­i­nists who would say that it was more like an appen­dix or even—this was seri­ous­ly maintained—a tumor. That non­sense seems to have stopped. … Embry­ol­o­gy con­firms moral­i­ty. The words ‘unborn child,’ even when used in a politi­cized man­ner, describe a mate­r­i­al real­i­ty.

Let us not be anti-sci­ence:

• The unborn child has its own DNA, dis­tinct from the moth­er’s;
• The unborn child has its own blood­stream, and some­times its own blood type;
• In half of all preg­nan­cies, even the sex of the child is dis­tinct from the moth­er’s;
• It is pos­si­ble for a wom­an’s immune sys­tem to reject an embryo because it inter­prets it as a sep­a­rate harm­ful invad­er;
• A moth­er and her unborn child can die inde­pen­dent­ly from the oth­er

An unborn child is sim­ply not “a wom­an’s own body,” and the argu­ment needs to be retired. An unborn child is its own body, its own life, wor­thy of the same respect as the moth­er’s. There may be many argu­ments in favor of the pro-choice posi­tion, or against the recent laws in Geor­gia and Alaba­ma. There may be many rea­sons to admire AOC. But this is not one of them.