@OldMetalHead She knew the possibilities when she had sex--it's half my baby too. Who decided that she has the right to deprive me of a child? Only women get to decide who has families? Seriously? Yes, having sex has the potential to cause a baby and they might have to carry it for a whopping 9 months. Even worse if they both are having sex to make a kid and she changes her mind. Breach of implied contract. The cost of having unprotected sex or breaking a contract. Called assumption of risk. It's why they sometimes make a little girl carry around a baby 24 hours to see what it's like and perhaps dissuade they from having a kid too early or out of wedlock. At 65 I'm not too worried about getting someone pregnant. Plus I'd still have to pay for the kid. So not only do women get to decide whether I can have my kid or not but they can force me to pay for a kid I don't want. Sorry, the horror of carrying a kid for 9 months, an assumed risk, doesn't get to ruin my life in the process. Don't want to carry a kid for 9 months then better damn well make sure you don't create one with a guy who wants his kid.

@lerlo You are being unbelieveably legalistic here.

@TomMcGiverin Probably comes from being a lawyer but if I was in the circumstance I would want my kid.

@OldMetalHead Every woman knows what she's getting into when she has sex. Just because the "norm" has been that she gets to dictate if a kid is born or not doesn't make it right in all circumstances. I'm suggesting that there's another equal party involved and his rights and desires get to count too. 9 MONTHS of carrying a child she might not want vs. the potential of 18 YEARS of paying for one a man doesn't want.

@OldMetalHead Gallup Poll from this year shows 43% of women self-identify as pro-life. Older people vote at higher percentages, too, so the 58% of pro-lifers 65 years of age and older carries even more weight. Eliminating men from the equitation does not guarantee reproduce rights are protected...