i don't think it was ever really in question. And i don't think there was any argument about its legality. It was more around the moral side. Which for life threatening situations should be an easy call. Either 1 dies or they both die. The main focus was on at what point should a clump of cells be considered worth of full human rights

for once it is worthy of full human rights, then usually the right to life trumps most others (Within reason)

@DrYuriMom

First off, @DrYuriMom, I think that yes, there are matters of life or liberty which justify abortion.

Those being rape or a threat to the mother's life.

Those would be matters to be considered medical.

hmm, i wonder, in the case of rape where a female is the rapist, does that mean the male can choose to have it aborted?

In those cases the male should not be financially responsible for the kid...

obviously, the concept of financial abortion.

but technically, minus medical costs, a female could to

I've seen courts rule some fucked up rulings.

me too

but this is not about current settings

https://nypost.com/2017/07/23/man-ordered-to-pay-65k-in-child-support-for-kid-who-isnt-his/

but think about it: if you have something you consider life, when its one direction (male raping a female), we give the victim the option to kill it. But when going in the other direction (female raping a male) we don't.

It's still life.

both should always have the option to not be financially responsible after giving birth if they don't want to.

both being the vicitms

I suppose I'd say it's a philosophically dirty act, but necessary.

yes, but why give one the option not the other? is life when the rapist is male just not as valuable?

because of body autonomy

That's a hard question to answer.

More or less what he said.

yes, but that is why we try to devalue the fetus as not being life

but if it is not life, then why not give the victims equal footing

victim gets to decide whether to abort or not

Its devalued as less than life to give those who undergo it more peace of mind

criminal forfeits their choice.

but if it is life, how much less is life worth than body autonomy?

I'm washing my hands of that call.

We have body autonomy for corpses

I've no sympathy for the hypothetical rapist.

Criminals get body autonomy too, even after they die

Two wrongs dont make a right and I see no point in violating people's rights anymore than absolutely necessary

If a woman wants to get an abortion she should talk it over with the father first

yes, then why violate the right to life over the right to body autonomy

and for rape, for someone who is as much a victim

Because the body autonomy right supersedes the right to life

Cant take organs out of a corpse if they didnt sign a donor card before they passed

I think you could get permission from the family, but dont quote me on that

california is fucked they dont even execute when the person wants it