The National Center For Men has filed a lawsuit that might do more harm to Roe vs Wade than anything to date. An article in Human Events puts it this way:
Our lawsuit will be filed on behalf of Matt Dubay, 25, a computer technician from Saginaw, Michigan. The state of Michigan is seeking to force Matt to pay child support for a child he never intended to bring into the world. Matt insists that the child's mother repeatedly assured him she could not get pregnant and, also, Matt says that she knew he did not want to have a child with her. Matt is asking for the reproductive choice he would have had if he were "Mattilda."
Bill O'Reilly interviewed one of the leaders of The National Center For Men. They agreed that men should take the moral responsibility of raising any child they father. However, in the case of Roe, morality is divorced from law. Thus, a strong argument can be made that men should be equally able to decide whether or not they will pay for a child they didn't want. Call it Mens' choice.
Legally, it might look like this. If the women lies about any aspect of her ability to get pregnant, and she knew or should have known that the man didn't want to have a baby with her, then he would have no LEGAL responsibility.
Then, once learning that she is pregnant, he would be able to make a choice whether he is willing to support the child or would choose abortion or adoption instead. He would have the same 90 days with no questions asked, and then after 90 days would be faced with tests having to do with whether having this child might interfere with his health.
If at any time after 90 days, he cannot establish that the woman lied or deceived him, or any type of health problem, then he would be legally responsible.
WOW! This is going to court. It might be the beginning of pro aborts understanding how rediculous their arguments for women's choice are.