No, what I believe and what I'll argue for the case of this hypothetical are two different things. In reality, abortion is legal and women have the privilege to opt that child out of life. But if they don't, then the kid is still there and the man has to pay up. That's reality and that's not going to change. So the purpose of these sorts of threads are purely hypothetical and we're released from any real world moral quandary.
Ok... I agree to this scenario.
In that light, I use your arguments because your arguments reverse side heavily depending on gender. No woman is forced (outside of rape) to become pregnant, there was always a choice and it takes two. People keep saying "well the man should have kept it in his pants", but that essentially assumes that the woman is a non-contributor to the initial sex act. But she had a choice as well. There was always a choice. The choice has probability of creating life and in the case of abortion/child support that probability is realized. In the purely theoretical context of divorce from responsibility, if one side is given it (and regardless of how you want to define life or whatever so that people can feel better in the real world about what they are doing, abortion is the extinguishing of life for the current convenience of the one involved) then both sides are given it. If the woman can abort and chooses not to, she cannot force the man to support HER decision.
I agree with you. Both the man and woman bear equal responsibility for the creation of life. It just so happens that the woman is the receptacle for this life, which is why her choice over abortion or childbirth favors her power in this situation. If, hypothetically, the situation were reverse and the males of our species carried the fetuses, then I would argue for their rights over the women.
I also agree that there is a gender-heavy aspect to this debate, but it's not because I'm some feminist who wants the default to be the woman's right. It has to do more with natural determinism. The woman has more power because nature has made it this way. The man gives up some sperm and then, biologically speaking, his job is done. You're making it seem like I'm being heavy handed against men out of spite, but I promise you that's not where I'm coming from.
When I say the man should have kept it in his pants, the same of true of the woman; however, given the legal system and the biological imbalance of power, men are actually MORE at risk of losing their power to choose here. This is why it's even
more important that men be careful which partners they choose and who they sleep with.
In a real world application as it would relate to your final statement; if abortion were not legal such that the woman could not abort; then there would be no circumstance other than mutual agreement/contract under which the man could shirk his financial responsibility to the child.
I don't understand. Why is such a legal contract contingent upon a woman's right to abort? Are we playing tit for tat here? A lot of women in America don't choose abortion, and if they didn't intend to get pregnant, the options for the child must come into effect.
I appreciate this hypothetical discussion but in reality you can't isolate the factors. Women have more reproductive control - it's just reality. We live in a patriarchy for the most part and men have other special powers. This is one power they don't have, and IMO this is the reason why we are having this argument: men are pissed that they don't have as much reproductive control as women. But this isn't about feminism... it's just biology.
And at the end of the day, children matter more. I know, I know, people are sick of "think about the children!" arguments, in this case it's true. The most effective way to minimize social burden here is making the man pay - and that has never been contingent upon a woman's right to choose. Child welfare is still a separate topic from abortion rights and male reproductive rights. If the kid is born then someone has to care for it. I'd rather it be the two people who made it than anyone else.