An argument in favor of legalized abortion.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So basically the argument is "I brought you into this world and I can take you out of it"?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So basically the argument is "I brought you into this world and I can take you out of it"?

Only if there is no alternative course of action which allows you to protect and to exercise your rights while also allowing the other party/person to live longer.

Ok, then the question becomes which rights are important enough that they could ever justify killing a child.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So basically the argument is "I brought you into this world and I can take you out of it"?

Only if there is no alternative course of action which allows you to protect and to exercise your rights while also allowing the other party/person to live longer.

Ok, then the question becomes which rights are important enough that they could ever justify killing a child.

Bodily autonomy, of course.

However, I have a question for you--if you would have voluntarily plugged yourself Violinist-style into another person's body (with consent, of course), should you be able to prematurely withdraw your consent and prematurely unplug yourself and thus cause this other person to die?

No, you have an obligation to that person, as in that case they do to you also.
and I don't understand what tort law has to do with any of this.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

However, I have a question for you--if you would have voluntarily plugged yourself Violinist-style into another person's body (with consent, of course), should you be able to prematurely withdraw your consent and prematurely unplug yourself and thus cause this other person to die?

Uh, the violinist argument hinges precisely on your connection to the violinist being involuntary. I've never heard or read any moral philosopher, with any standpoint on abortion, argue otherwise. (I say that as somebody who's pro-life but thinks the tacit consent argument is stupid and, society being what it currently is, implicitly sexist--if we're going to say that consent to PIV sex equals tacit consent for the mother to go through nine months of pregnancy, however many hours of labor, and however many days of post-partum complications (and it does the pro-life cause no good to minimize the fact that these are very serious things to ask of someone), what in the world is there for the father to tacitly consent to?!)

To support her in whatever ways she needs during that time, and to be a father?  You are right though that it is hard to assure this obligation will be fulfilled.