Living like a parasite makes you a parasite.
It does not matter that you use a narrow definition that capriciously excludes a developing fetus.
There's nothing capricious about it. A parasite is dependent upon another organism (not of its species) for life without providing any benefit to said organism.
A human fetus IS dependent upon another organism of the SAME SPECIES for survival AND it provides some benefits to that other host organism.
Even if you remove the requirement that a parasite is of a different species than its host, you cannot remove the fact that a fetus confers some biological health benefit to the mother. It's just not convenient for your argument that women can have abortions because it's only a parasite.
Women can have abortions because it's their body and they get to choose their own medical care and make decisions in their own best interests without justifying it to anyone else. Certainly without torturing the meaning of words.
Furthermore, in any discussion of abortion, there is always discussion of various stages of pregnancy. Roe V Wade makes that absolutely pertinent as it notes that abortion can only be regulated after viability.
It is important to actually know what you are talking about when you are talking about physical, biological processes. That means knowing and understanding terms, words, what they mean, what they imply.
If that's too difficult for anyone, I suggest they stay out of the argument and let women do what the courts have decided they can do, what any man is able to do: make medical decisions in their own best interests.