Why is “responsibility” on the woman an undue burden but, according to B Hussein O, “responsibility” on the father is a due burden???

If, from conception, the father has responsibility, why does the woman get to take that responsibility away, denying the father’s responsibility, by aborting the pregnancy?

Of course, Obama’s answer will be that he personally disagrees with child-killing, but the choice should remain legal for women.==

If the father’s responsibility begins at conception — that is, he has a due burden, a burden that is due — and a child is there to accept the father’s responsibility, then State pressure on the woman cannot be an undue burden, rather due, in the same way that State pressure on the father is a due burden, not undue.

You’d think that, with all that Libtard talk about intelligence and reasoning and the scientific and logic, they’d be able to see their inconsistencies. But no. Not ever, and I exist to pounce on every inconsistency I can find, and they’re not difficult to find. They hand them to us on a silver platter.

I am also glad that Obamarama recognizes that SOMETHING happens at conception. I had always thought that Libtards believe that nothing happens at conception, that everything happens at birth.