I did read what you said. It was only a few short sentences.

I GET where the miscommunication of your intended message came from, but I still take issue with your initial claim that you made it "quite clear," because it wasn't.

Let me explain how it wasn't 'quite clear' to me.

Every sentence in your OP was about the father and condoms, followed by "ya lay, ya pay."

When a person reads that, it is implied that 'ya lay, ya pay' is directed at men because that's who you were talking about.

What you probably SHOULD have stated in the beginning was "Men and women have a choice when it comes to parenthood: birth control."

And if you are suggesting that men and women have an EQUAL responsibility in using birth control, then why would she then be allowed to abort?

"It's her body!"

I agree. So since we know it's her body, then why is she not protecting herself from becoming pregnant in the first place? If she is the sole arbiter (which she is) of whether the unintentional child is born or not, then why is she not MORE responsible for ensuring birth control measures are in place? After all, it's her body.

So, the ability to prevent pregnancy is equal, but the choice to birth is NOT equal. I believe this needs to be equal and to do that, both parties should be allowed to "abort" (either financially or physically).

If that were the case, I think we'd see a lot fewer pregnancies (AND abortions) because women would then do far more to protect herself from pregnancy until she knows the person she is having sex with will stick around.