The problem is, though, there's only one method of protecting yourself if you're a guy, and that's a condom, and it's quite often avoided because it reduces sexual pleasure for both parties. Plus, with men, it's either you have a condom at the time, or you don't. If a fit bird gives you the eye on a night out, and you don't have a rubber, then your ****ed.
*cough* ever heard of swapping numbers and getting a coffee? *cough*
If she wants your cock, she can have sex with you, and then she can take a pill in the morning. There is still time. OR she can get an implant which means she is basically safe from pregnancy as long as she has it in place. Men have to remember to go out, buy it, and take it wherever they go in case they get a bite, and if you don't do it with a rubber then you've basically got to pray she doesn't get pregnant.
So women should have all the responsibility? Tad unfair...
And I don't like the way people word it when they say men "get women pregnant", like pregnancy is caused by males and is inflicted upon females, like it's all the mens responsibility. It seems when it comes to pregnancy, men are always the guilty culprits who have forced themselves upon women, and women are always classed as the innocent party who deserve rights.
A woman is fertilized by a man, it's just an objective fact (though some women have of course tried other things 
)
When a man has sex with a woman, he's consented to sex, not necessarily making a child.
That portrays a very modern view indeed. Only in recent times have men and women discussed sex as an activity separate from producing children. The ultimate point is to make children, so if you make a child doing it you can't be f-ing gobsmacked can you? No condom means you should be prepared for possible children. EDIT:UNLESS you have one on and she still gets pregnant, or she's tossing you off in your sleep and shoving it down her passage with a spoon, you can't complain about the fact you've made a child
My arguments weren't against abortion. Women should have total and utter right to control their bodies. My argument was for fathers having the right to reject parenthood.
If women want to keep the child and raise it, then that's fine, but I don't think fathers should have to pay child support in all cases.
I've looked into this subject a lot, and yes I agree men can play a big part in a childs life, but tell that to the mothers that are legally entitled to abandon their children. That's what I'm saying. If women can give up their kids, then men should be allowed to do it also.
Tash, I merely pointed out that you haven't considered the broader implications of what your saying, not putting words in your mouth. Government control affects policy, and it clearly impacts on most laws involving parenthood. If they didn't provide incentive for family units, and then combining the current attitudes towards gratification with a legal practice of no financial ramifications, you'd have unstable singletons running around making tonnes of babies, many likely to fall into criminal activity or, if you look at the current economic failure, become one of the many millions out of work. You can't physically have a discussion about the rights and wrongs of law-making without due consideration of the fall-out.
