Parity For Pro Choice — A Man’s Right to Choose

Reposting again because others are talking about this: “Having sex is not consent to parenthood for women, so why should it be for men?”

This is a repost from a year ago. I am prompted to repost it now after reading James Taranto’s article in today’s Wall Street Journal: The Limits of Moral Suasion: Mayor Bloomberg Tries to Follow Charles Murray’s Advice. The Supreme Court decided in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that men have no reproductive rights. It follows logically that if men have no reproductive rights they have no reproductive responsibility. This logic has profound effects on society, and it has not gone unnoticed by men. That’s the line of thinking in which I wrote the following:

We all know that a woman’s right to choose is sacred, right?  A woman’s choice in one instance may result in an unwanted pregnancy, but she can correct that by exercising another choice, her choice to terminate her pregnancy.  We sometimes hear it expressed as a choice not to become a parent.  I think that’s an accurate way of phrasing it.

So what about a man’s right to choose?  Hold on there, you say.  A man cannot become pregnant, what’s for him to choose?  He made his choice when he had sex that resulted in a woman’s unwanted pregnancy.  The only choice now available is left to her.

Maybe not.  If we can find a way to achieve parity in this situation, shouldn’t we take a serious look at that?  After all, equality of people in all situations is a high goal of liberals everywhere.  It’s not just equality of opportunity that lights the way for liberals, it’s equality of outcomes they most cherish.  Everyone being able to reach the finish line at the same time, nobody being embarrassed or offended, that’s the ticket to the good life for liberals.

Well I’ve thought of a way that a man can have the freedom to choose on a parity with a woman’s freedom and right to choose. For this I expect to have the thanks and praise of liberals everywhere.

This modest proposal doesn’t involve the slightest interference with the woman’s right to choose.

A man’s right to choose, under my proposal, will be made possible by enacting a new law in each state that provides in all cases of the pregnancy of a woman to whom a man is not married, so long as the sexual intercourse was consensual and legal, that the man involved may choose not to be the parent of the child so conceived simply by filing an affidavit in a state registry created for that purpose, and stating his choice not to be the parent of the child his sexual partner now carries.  If the affidavit is timely filed before the baby is born the man shall never be held responsible as the father of the child, and the woman shall have no right to allege paternity against that man.

In order to protect the privacy of the woman involved the registry should not be a public record.   This is so because any man who suspects he might be the father but without knowing for sure, may file such an affidavit to protect himself from becoming the parent of an unwanted child.  In cases where multiple men file such affidavits related to one woman’s pregnancy her privacy and protection from undue embarrassment must be protected, of course.

I don’t know why equality obsessed liberals haven’t floated this modest proposal before, but I’m sure they’ll all be grateful someone has finally done it.  I will not insist my name be given to the legislation.

As long as the right things happen it really doesn’t matter who gets the credit.