Not entirely correct. The courts have not decided in the necessity of any abortion, but rather have stated that in specific situations, an abortion is not a criminal action.

Abortion laws do not protect a woman's health. Instead, a "Solomon's split" rationale has occurred, whereby a "woman's life" has been legally rationalized as being more valuable to society than that of a being requiring sustenance and protection from a host. That same rationale has the state finding itself mired in "pull the plug" decisions on a daily basis, especially since the issue has a fiscal impact. Sustenance and protection also covers most welfare recipients - should they be subject to termination for being dependent as well? Where's the line, and who says in won't shift again because we have "progressed" in our thinking?

Again, when we show how "smart" we are in these matters, how "dumb" we are always seems to take center stage.