I like to go to the Wikipedia main page to see the "Did you know" and "On this day" sections. And no, Wikipedia, I did not know that a Pennsylvania court ruled in 1978 that forcing someone to donate bone marrow to save someone else's life is unacceptable!
Why have I never heard of this case before with regards to abortion rights??
More below the jump.
The judge John P. Flaherty Jr. wrote that "For our law to compel [the] defendant to submit to an intrusion of his body would change every concept and principle upon which our society is founded. To do so would defeat the sanctity of the individual, and would impose a rule which would know no limits, and one could not imagine where the line would be drawn."
Why are mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds not challenged with this precedent?? It seems like if your body may not be intruded even to save the life of another human being, it DEFINITELY may not be intruded for a medically unnecessary but mandated-by-law procedure?
To go even further: could not the case be made, via McFall v. Shimp, that a woman with an unwanted pregnancy (regardless of whether the pregnancy is a result of a rape, although the case would be exceptionally strong in that circumstance), is entitled to refuse to host an embryo any longer?
I'm not a legal expert; it's just an angle and a court case I had not known about, and I thought I'd share. I can add this to my repertoire of court cases to cite when I argue with trolls about abortion rights.