The ugly truth about abortion is surfacing, bit by bit. The latest evidence of the disregard for the rights and well-being of women and children is a lawsuit filed by Matthew Dubay, proclaimed the public face of a men's rights movement which wants to eliminate any compulsory child support. They insist that they should have the same right to refuse to have and support a child that a woman does through legal elective abortion, that is, that there exists a constitutional freedom to "choose not to be a father" under the equal protection clause.

Dubay had sex with a woman who became pregnant and kept the child. She sued for child support. He is suing back, claiming a constitutional right to "avoid procreation" so that he won't have to have anything to do with parenting and supporting the child.

He and his maturity-challenged supporters evidently share the delusion that not wanting to be a father is an effective form of birth control. That this premise has been shown to be false repeatedly for centuries has not stopped the usual liberal denial of biology. Apparently it isn't enough to try to force the woman to undergo the emotional and health risks associated with abortion. Now the child must be punished by legal abandonment if she dares to give birth and insist that the child should be provided for by the biological father.

Child support is given to support the child, not the mother. The liberals have already cut her off so that she is rarely given any personal support for her part in producing and continuing to care for the child, even if the conception happened during a legal marriage. Women are supposed to be able to support themselves no matter how many dependants they have, and now the children are supposed to support themselves without a father's help as well.

The debate over this lawsuit has shown the predictable pattern. People who don't want to support their unborn children usually insist that there is no child, so there is no problem in aborting the whatever-they-conceived-is. The men supporting the suit apparently would prefer that the child was killed before it can "become" a human being at birth so there is no legal ground for them to work for eighteen years to support the non-child. It's the woman's fault for getting pregnant and saddling him with child support!

Excuse me, but women don't get pregnant without a man's sperm except for one rare case in history, and DNA tests can show who the sperm donor was. Further, since she is the one facing the medical trauma of the abortion, they have a snowball's chance in you-know-where of forcing the abortion before birth. So, this suit is an attempt at a legal abortion of the child's rights for support by the father.

They are now yelping for effective male birth control so they won't have to rely on undependable or even predatory women sinking their greedy hooks into the unwilling fathers. Ironically, the reason it wasn't developed to the degree that female birth control was is that the men didn't want to risk their virility. There are supposed to be experimental pills developed but languishing for lack of consumer support. Only the women got pregnant, so the men could keep their fertility and their male egos intact by brainwashing the women into automatically getting an abortion.

Too bad for them that biology still functions when a male deposits his sperm within swimming distance of a fertile egg in a healthy woman. That same biology encourages the woman to bear and raise the child. One would think that the "evolutionary forces" to perpetuate the species would equally compel him to protect his genes by supporting the child.

However, there was also a report that the liberals are literally dying out for lack of reproduction. The conservatives, heeding the call of biology to have and raise children, are producing a larger voter pool that is swinging society towards having more children and raising them to be conservatives. If you don't have the biological sense to conceive and nurture your children, then society must step in to support the ones who survive the liberal abortion policies to be born and declared human with human rights.

The only fair way to resolve this dilemma is to enforce child support on the two people who produced the child. Thus there are laws to protect the rights of children to support by both parents until they reach the age when they can support themselves. This is the real target of this lawsuit, not equal rights for men and women. If this legal contortion actually gets supported by a court, it will show just how heartless and witless this society, or at least the judge, has become.