”The argument, not my argument”"BIology is different, so that means the law is being unfair to me by not changing that."
That is the reality of your argument, and so you lose.
The reality of the law is that it is equal for everyone, but BIOLOGY dictates that not everyone takes advantage of the law. You see it as "The law gives only women the right to abort babies." It actually doesn't. The law makes abortion legal to anyone who is pregnant; BIOLOGY makes men not ever need to avail themselves of that law.
Equal under the law doesn't mean that any given law is going to have exactly the same impact and relevance to everyone. It means that IF a law has relevance to you, it will be applied to you exactly the same as it would be to anyone else it is relevant to.
And let me just reiterate this, since it doesn't seem to be sinking into the testosterone-poisoned rock skulls around here: abortion before a child is born and financial responsibility after a child is born is NOT an accurate comparison, so do NOT keep whining at me that "Women can kill their babies, so I shouldn't have to pay child support". Your responsibility begins when that child is actually born, and at that point, she is just as legally and financially liable as you are.
The argument, not my argument.
You are again confusing the act of abortion with the legal act of removing ones responsibility for childrearing. In women they are one in the same.
For men it would obviously be more complicated, notifications and timing and such.
As for your last part, that goes without saying, my attempt at this argument is that BEFORE birth, and as long as an abortion is legal and safe, why does only one side posses the legal ability to remove it's responsibility for parenthood.
LOLOL
I like how you keep running from the argument you keep arguing.
I am trying to come to an understanding about the position.
Trying to come to an understanding by attempting to foist this spurious argument off onto libertarians? How is that going to help you "come to an understanding"? Especially given that nothing about it aligns with libertarian principles.
Why not? Right now it's the government saying guys have to support kids born of their sperm, even if they don't want the kid.
Yes, well, society USED to say that. Common decency USED to say that. Since common decency isn't very common any more, government HAS to say it.
Meanwhile, libertarians aren't required to automatically kneejerk to hating something simply because a government entity said it. Libertarian isn't necessarily a synonym for anarchist.