That is an intellectually-dishonest position for you to take.

Of course both parties realize they are potentially taking the risk of creating a human life.

That doesn't mean they're ready to be parents. That doesn't mean they'd make good parents. That doesn't mean they *should* be parents. Especially when there are so many infertile (or LGBT+) couples willing to adopt.

Once the baby is conceived, the decision about THE PREGNANCY ITSELF should entirely shift to the woman who is carrying it. She should be able to have an abortion or carry it to term, because it's her body.

The biological father isn't carrying the child, so he shouldn't be able to make *that* specific decision for her. However, if he's unwilling or unable to be a father, his life should not be upended with 18 years of forced financial obligation due to his mistake...the same way a woman's life shouldn't be upended due to her mistake if she doesn't want to continue carrying the child in her body.

It's not a false equivalence. It's allowing both biological parents control over their own respective lives, IN SPITE OF A MISTAKE they may mutually believe they have made.

What happens when the biological mother doesn't even tell that biological father that she's pregnant -- and she has the baby, and *then* she floats back into his life (blindsiding him with the news) demanding child support? Should he be forced by the state to take a paternity test because she believes he is the father? What if she was with multiple sexual partners? At what point does this cross over into the government intruding into people's bedrooms? Or intruding into the male body, post-pregnancy?

I have no personal (individualized) stake in this particular scenario, since I am gay and I will never be in a position to get a woman pregnant. But I still support bodily-sovereignty and decision-making sovereignty across the board. That includes family planning...yes, even family planning that must unfortunately take place AFTER a child is conceived.