Her doing an abortion in the 8th month of pregnancy is the problem. What kind of doctor would allow such a thing? An abortion that late is not the same thing as an abortion in, say, the 10th week. This should not be allowed anywhere.

No, you were trying to troll. I called you out and you did a 180. You really do not seem to read thoroughly and jump the gun as there were no insults in  my original comments, unlike the poor attempts you made. 

Don't tell me what I can or cannot comment on thank you very much. I'll provide my opinion when I feel like it and I will call out people like you when it's needed. Good day.

I have no desire to join in an abortion conversation. One thing that always bugs me though is the idea that "It's the woman's body, she can do what she wants". This seems to only apply to the abortion decision, as any other time in our society we say she "is eating for two" and she has "a new life inside her" and other such comments. Further, we have come to hear couples say "we're pregnant" to link the father to the condition. And legally, fathers are responsible to pay child support. It's this last legal point which really baffles me. Fathers must pay for the care of a child if it is born but the child inside the mother is her body and her decision. This is a major inconsistency. Either the pregnancy and resulting child is the mother's and the hers alone, or both the pregnancy and the child belong to both. I suspect if this was properly challenged in a US court, either child support or abortion being at the mother's discretion would be thrown out. Keep in mind I'm not debating the morality of abortion, only that pregnancy/child ownership should be clearly defined as belonging to just the mother or both parents in a consistent fashion.

Um, adoption?

Easy solution. The father should be able to disown the child sometime before birth and not be obligated to pay child support. That way it's 100% the mother's decision but also she can't force the consequences on the father.

In humans, sex has always been about more then procreation. It has been about love and strengthening the bonds between two adults. It's a social activity, essentially. This is why only about 5% of sexual activity actually results in a child. This is why humans have developed other methods of sexual activity beyond intercourse, it's why we can mate year round and not just during specific seasons when we are "in heat" (as is the case with other animals were mating is ONLY for procreation). Humans aren't even the only animals that mate for pleasure and bonding: this has also been witnessed in Bonobos.

In fact, the idea that sex is purely for procreation is the far more recent construct, probably stemming from religious beliefs, and probably developed for practical purposes to prevent mothers from having children with unfaithful mates, and being forced to raise those children alone.

Also, in my opinion, abortions in the seventh month, when 90% of fetuses are able to survive outside the womb, should not be legal unless the mother's life hangs in the balance and there is no other way. I'm a little surprised an abortion at 8 months is even legal.

This would effectivley end child support for pre-birth seperated parents.  An unkind but legally consistent solution.  The other option, of course, is for a father to have the right to block the woman carrying his child's abortion.  The second option thus making the father able to hold a mother to a life of child-raising just as a mother can do right now - at least financially.

You can't make someone give birth.

Sure you can.  As much as you can make someone look after a child, pay for a child, not murder people, pay taxes and other things we force on individuals.  Society can do what it wants, rightly or wrongly.

It's cruel and unusual punishment. I hate to make this comparison but for psychological effect it's probably similar to rape (nonconsensual violation of genitals)

Don't make this a political issue. This is strictly an ethical one.