Did you become confused?
Sure thing? That is not the same reasoning, sir.
Whether or not I pay a woman for the next 18 years is entirely up to her to decide. I have no say. Big taxation, no representation. I'm compelled to open my wallet on the basis of her decision alone. I don't think that's right.
And you seem so keen to recognize and remove a woman's financial incentive to become pregnant in the form of welfare, yet you want to keep her incentivized by making her the sole voter in whether a man's wallet is open to her for nearly two decades. Would abortion stats be the same if a baby didn't come with free money from one source or another? Come on.
In b4 do the rite thang. As if every man and woman hasn't had sex with someone they wouldn't want to deal with for 18 long years. Can I get a witness?
This is really really simple (bears pay attention - this is for you too)
the woman has the burden of dealing with all the issues of being pregnant and giving birth.
She has an extra burden and it's happening in her body .....therefore it's solely her choice
If you're old enough to have sex then you're old enough to deal with the consequences of your actions.
When the day comes when the woman can extract the fertilized egg and give it to the man to gestate and give birth to then we will all be equal.
Until that day the women gets the choice of whether to get an abortion or give birth and if she choose to give birth then BOTH the mother and the father are responsible for supporting that child. The courts exist to make sure the father follows through with his obligation so that his obligation to support his child does not fall on the rest of us.
If you don't like this system then you might be better off in a country where women are in fact treated as the mans property.
Of course, you always retain the option to simply not have sex and then you won't have to deal with the unintended consequences of your actions