Quote:
|
Question: How does this fit in with child support laws and whatnot? If the father has no role in deciding that the child lives, should he have a role in having to take care of the child unwillingly if he wanted the abortion to take place, but had no role in the decision?
|
One doesn't fit in with the other. One shouldn't fit in with the other.
Honestly, this is purely offtopic
unless you're really suggesting that "the father has a role in the decision", which is at best nonsensical. What role? Can he veto the pregnancy? Can he veto the abortion? That wouldn't be a role, that would be the entire freaking decision.
If the emphasis is on the "should he have a role in having to take care of the child unwillingly", then it really has nothing to do with abortion at all. The question remains whole regardless of the legal status of abortion. The idea that a legal right to unilaterally opt out of parenthood altogether should be awarded to fathers to compensate for women being deemed to have the right to control their own bodies,
a right that men enjoy without question, is ludicrous.
If one thinks that the right to unilaterally opt out of parenthood should exist, why wouldn't it exist for both mothers and fathers? Why not argue that instead of tacking the issue onto abortion? Because the latter is clearly an empty rethorical cliché the point of which isn't quite clear.
*Abortion being the right to unilaterally opt out of pregnancy, having as much to do with opting out of parenthood as vasectomies do.