Do you believe abortion is only a women's rights issue? Why or why not?
Generally no, but there are specific situations which would qualify.
Women's rights issues are strictly situations where women are not recognized in their full personhood/citizenship/etc.
I think for the sake of ease in casual discussion one may at times expand this term to view issues important to women(e.g. abortion), or predominately related to women(e.g. childcare in the workplace), or gender-specific (e.g. women's sports); but, to actually classify with such broad circumstances, promotes one to under-account for the many stakeholders involved in all those broader, perhaps better termed: 'women's issues'.
A women's rights issue really comes down to if something meets a threshold of 'equality before the law'. So for example, and as related to this topic. In Roe v Wade. The laws at issue: Articles 1191-1194 and 1196 of the Texas Penal Code (1961). Provided only one exception to giving birth: "procured or attempted by medical advice".
I think 'abortion restriction' in that narrow context meets the threshold of not viewing women as equal before the law.
No person should require a doctor to be of the "purpose of saving the life(inc quality) of the mother."
It thus seems to me, this law diminished a women's capacity to known when these purposes fit her circumstances, which is plainly a women's rights issue.
In that narrow case, I can be seen as pro-choice. As I do acknowledge a fundamental injustice and sexism.
Enter, a more common example of questions surrounding abortion & abortion restrictions. Planned Parenthood v. Casey / Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt. Law at issue: Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act(1982) & Texas House Bill 2.
Neither was well-written legislation or "good laws" in opinion as both are examples of big government, unenforceable[with consistency], sounding arbitrary and overly punitive. That said, most laws are drafted terribly IMHO. To get back to the point, and skipping the legal argument, is the fundamental argument made by the court: "these laws create an undue burden on the constitutionally protected right of women to abort based on viability" a win on a women's rights issues?
Not in the slightest! Most people do not by law get to unilaterally issue decrees involving many parties (e.g. parents, husbands, community) just because they are at the centre, especially when those choices which have deep moral consequences and far-reaching impacts(e.g. killing the next Steve jobs); including societal (e.g. due to disproportionate black abortion, black are significantly lower in our population directly due to higher abortion). The counter-argument here, of course, being: "her body, her choice."
A nice saying to be sure, but an oversimplified one. The sentiment here is an example of a privilege(legally promised) being upheld at the cost of equal rights of all the other stakeholders. It is by my view the exact opposite of what 'women's rights' seeks; violating the moral arguments of which that noble principle stands.
Thus I say broadly, no abortion and abortion restrictions involve many considerations and are far too broad a topic to simply be mostly about woman's rights. That said: certain laws, opinions and contexts are directly women's rights. Women have the capacity and responsibility to make moral health choices, wherein the considerations and protections for potential life dismiss that inherit truth, so in does abortion becomes as simple as giving back women their god-given rights and recognizing them as equal before the law.