system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I think legal paternal surrender (finacial abortion) should be legal for men. CMV

There is nothing forcing women to get pregnant. They have a plethora of contraceptive options, and if they fail, the morning after pill and abortion. And if she doesn't want those, safe havens. 

Women have 100% of the decision making power here. The child lives or dies according to her wish. This means that she should also have the full responsibility. There is nothing forcing women to be a parent. Women choose to stay pregnant. That is important to note. 

Men however have no say. How is that right? 

Is it because he had sex? That is an argument of consequence. Just because I didn't lock my door, doesn't mean I deserve to have my house broken into.

Because it is in the best interest of the child? This is a double standard. When a woman wants an abortion, she is allowed. If she is unable or unwilling to take care of it, the state pays/accepts it for adoption. Why is it up to men to pay the price for a child they never consented to creating? The child doesn't even have the right to life yet, as exemplified by its mother's right to abort it.
Women have ways out every step of the way. Men have to pray the condom doesn't break.

Children don't have the kind of rights they'd need to have for that argument to make sense. They have no expectation of financial support from their parents except for this one unique situation where a custodial parent is demanding it and an easy target is available for collection. Two parents who remain married can both be unemployed on welfare without the state chasing one or the other for child support. They can put the child up for adoption and avoid the entirety of child rearing costs, and in many cases a mother can leave a baby at a fire station and make it the state's problem. The common theme here is that the wants of both parents, when aligned, by far outweigh any supposed rights we think children ought to have.

And even if everything I said above was somehow false. What about when the woman forgets her pill, or simply doesn't take it? Does fraud, or an accident on her part justify the man paying for something he didn't want for nearly two decades? 

Anyways, I'm going long here. Thoughts?
gpt
Generally speaking, child support isn't really about either parent. If a woman keeps the baby, that baby is going to come into the world no matter what and it will need monetary support. If not from the father, it'd come from the state and everyone would still end up paying for it. Child support doesn't really care about what the mother or father are up to, it's just there to support the child who now exists and needs to be paid for.