Article here. Excerpt:
'However, in Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled that the rights of the individual living mother outweighed the rights of the unborn child, and therefore made abortion legal. In doing so, and considering the arguments of both sides it attempted to address individual rights but the SCOTUS failed to take into the consideration the legal implications and the rights of the father.
A woman has complete and utter control over her own body—this much has been established by Roe vs. Wade and other rulings. Yet, what about the man? Does he not have any rights over his own body? Should a woman choose to bring to term a child that may not be wanted by his father, the father is nevertheless legally and financially bound by that decision. It is a well-established legal concept that a man must provide financial support for the child that was mutually conceived but solely brought to term by another person’s (the woman) decision.
As such, the Roe vs. Wade decision has effectively made one member of society an economic slave to another person’s decision.'
