Now ask yourself, why does our legal system order men to pay child support when the child is supposedly not partially theirs inside of the womb?
It doesn't.
Nor do men have to share the cost of abortion.
A man has no responsibility in the matter whatsoever, unless and until he is a father.
And he is not a father unless and until a child is born.
A fetus takes what it needs to survive by extracting it from the body of its host, with or without her consent. it will continue to do so even to her detriment; it will continue to do so, even- in rare instances- to her death.
No man can do anything for a fetus. It doesn't need anything from any man.
But a child is a different story; children do need things from their fathers; they do suffer from having absent fathers, and it is correct and justified, in my opinion, that society
forces fathers to support their children monetarily (it cannot force them to be present physically and/or emotionally) in instances where they refuse to do so of their own volition.
In situations where a father is the primary caregiver/ custodian, society is correct and justified in forcing the
mother to contribute monetarily to the welfare of the child, although again, it cannot force her to be present physically or emotionally.
Both parents can and should be made to contribute financially to their child's maintainance and upkeep. There is no way the state or society can force absent or non-custodial parents to love their children, if they don't. But we can force them to pay money.
All this is irrelevant when it comes to a fetus, however, because a fetus requires nothing except what it extracts from the body of the person it is inhabiting. There is nothing any outside party can contribute which would benefit a fetus in any way. At best, contributions would benefit the pregnant woman- but no, the law does not presently require that men financially support women they've impregnated. It requires that parents of
both sexes support their children after their children are born.
