How valid is the right of privacy relative to abortion?

Show me exactly where in 1A, 3A, 5A, 9A, and especially 14A [all of which except 14A lack the term "privacy" in any variation of the word, and all of which were used to support Roe v. Wade], where a woman's specific privacy, at the exclusion of a man's, is stipulated. Not to mention that, in the 14A, "secure in their persons" does not imply "privacy." One can be private and secure in a crowd, but insecure while private in their own home.
Don't bother looking; your answer s not in the Constitution However, don't let me convince you. Look.
Not to mention that the tissue inclusive of the fetus, umbilical, amniotic sac, and placenta, do not share DNA or blood with the mother; it is a completely separate and distinct entity. Not one whit of it is part of her body.

The proof: when a woman opens her mouth, her tongue does not fall out.

Then she has every right to eject it from her body.

That allows no consideration of the typical limit to rights, such as, mine end where your nose begins. Yes, yes, I know the arguments of the legal definition of human life, and that the law limits that definition to full birth. But, the law, at times, lags behind not just science, but ethics and common sense. After all, the law does not drive culture; it is the reverse.

And when she has evolved a means to accomplish that without intervention by artificial means, then you have an argument. And, I also contend that the whole matter will need reevaluation just as soon as the fetus has adapted to present a successful rejection of abortion, naturally. What, then? Whose rights are whose?

I thought we were discussing a woman's rights, not law. Law is irrelevant in relation to rights.

You have already conceded that the fetus is an invasive organism, does a male need a law allowing him the right to remove an invasive organism from his body?

Wow! That will require substantiation by more convincing than a sock puppet credential. Read James Madison. The rights of man are what define the parameters of the law. A good hard read of the Constitution ought to settle that score. Read the 9A and 10A; Madison's concluding thoughts regarding the Bill of Rights. It may take more reads as well. I read it fore to aft monthly, and I'm in it virtually daily, and have done so for at least ten ears, and I'm still scratching the surface of that most misunderstood of American documents. Read the four volumes of Madison's letters. You've got to want to do these things as if driven to madness without them. I can be a bloody search but well worth it.

You're going to have to do better than that. I did not concede that at all. Half of the chromosomes making the zygote are contributed by the woman. That does not change. Yes, it grows and develops entirely within her body, and it is genetically of her issue, plus the man's, but it is no more a part of her body than a ping pong ball is held in your hand. More to the point, if you did not continuously wash your hands, they would each collect an amalgam of various oils, sweat, and internal debris that is entirely of your production, like the zygote in a woman, but it is expelled, like the woman.  Is that such a hard concept to wrap around?