It doesn't matter if you don't agree that a woman's body has secondary rights, your position makes the rights of the woman secondary to the rights of the fetus. You state that plainly when you say, "My operating principle is that no one, the woman, her boyfriend, the participating doctor, has the right to deprive that fetus of it's right to live." Since the woman's rights to her body come after the rights of the fetus to her body, by definition that means the woman's rights are secondary.
I am curious though if you feel this right to life above all other considerations extends to people after they are born. Does a human's right to life also take priority over another human's right to bodily autonomy. If a person is dieing and needs a kidney transplant, do you believe the government should be allowed to forcibly remove someone else's kidney to save the dying person's life?
The fetus' right to life is completely dependent, for survival, on protection and life sustaining nutrition and oxygen provided by it's mother's womb. Without that, it's life would be snuffed out. I wouldn't say that this means the mother's rights are secondary by definition, but as a consequence of the realities of human life. I suppose one could consider this 'secondary' right subordinate for the good of our race and our mutual survival. I consider it mute, that the distinction doesn't matter. It's a simply physical reality in the cycle of human life.
The right to a kidney from some who's life isn't directly dependent of any one individual. That which isn't part of that special and unique relationship between a mother and her unborn child or any other special relationship That would be confiscatory. It is, ofc, tragic, if one cannot acquire a kidney from some kind donor. Such is our lot, based on our own nature (not being willing to make such sacrifices). On the plus side, advancements is medical science have made dialysis more viable for longer periods of time, extending the opportunity for someone in need of a kidney to find one. We live strange lives where we want to do good, but fail to do so. It's like we have forgotten what even the ancient Greeks knew, that the virtues are essential to a just society.
It really hits me wrong when people say that rape babies are "part of god's plan", As it directly is in conflict with his teachings that are in the bible, starting with some of the 10 commandments.
Yeah, that's nuts. God's plan isn't for men to be evil. We made our choice, however that took place. We chose our own way over God when God's plan for a life with him. Even when God made his way plain as day to the Jewish people and then to the world in Christ. How that happened is a matter of debate within my church, to what degree is it Genesis allegorical and how does it fit in with the evidence of human evolution. God chose not to spell everything out about us and our relationship to Him, but He did give us creative minds and the gift of the Holy Spirit to guide us - so we have to work at it.