(The follwing is part of our weeklong Roe v. Wade Blog-a-thon)
(crossposted at MeanRachel.com)

If men could become pregnant, an abortion would be renamed a gentler term, like "release."  This would remind those around them that they're not aborting a life but declining the option to begin one. 
 
Religious men would argue that the Bible's failure to directly address abortions indicates that becoming pregnant is such a personal event, even God himself could not seek to interfere.  Psalm 139, when David praises God for letting his life begin in the womb, would no longer only symbolize the sovereignty of life.  It would instead remind us that babies are "made in secret (v. 15)," and that a child should be "skillfully wrought (v. 15)," not hastily or unilaterally brought into this world for lack of an alternative.

If men could become pregnant, they would toss change down on the counter for birth control pills when they picked up their six-pack of Heineken.  They would have unlimited access to their reproductive health care professionals and no annual insurance limits on how many times they could be seen.
 
They would be careful with their promises.
 
They would be driving along with their girlfriend and announce, without a drop of shame, that they had decided to have a release.  It would be understood and accepted; likely commonplace and unemotional.  There would be no tears or discussion, just a day where they didn't come to work.
 
Life would begin at the first heartbeat and clenched five-fingered fist. 
 
Some men might choose to carry the baby, deciding that a release wasn't necessary.  Some might decide that they aren't financially stable enough.  Some might feel the mother of the child wasn't the one they wanted to raise children with.  But if men could become pregnant, they would all agree on one common concept:  There would be a choice.