Roberts and a Man's Right to Choose an Abortion

I have recently come across this snippet from Roberts' confirmation hearings:

FEINSTEIN: In Bray, you argued on behalf of the government as deputy solicitor general that the right to have an abortion is not specific to one gender. Specifically, your brief stated, quote, unlike the condition of being pregnant, the right to have an abortion is not a fact that is specific to one gender, end quote.

Here is the paragraph from the brief Roberts authored and argued:

There are more interests at stake in the abortion decision than those of the pregnant woman. The government has a legitimate interest in protecting both the unborn child and the health of the mother, Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. at 324-325; Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 162, 164-165 (1973); the parents of a pregnant minor have a valid interest in participating in their daughter's decision whether to carry her pregnancy to term, Hodgson v. Minnesota, 110 S. Ct. 2926 (1990); and the father of the child has a personal interest in the pregnant woman's decision. Thus, unlike the condition of being pregnant, the "right" to have an abortion is not a fact that is specific to one gender. Instead, it is a legal right as to which the law can properly assign different interests to various parties.

As I read it, Roberts' response to Senator Feinstein did not have him backing off of this position in the Bray brief.  This may be bad news for a woman's right to choose.  But it may mean that my argument for a man's right to choose could be heard sympathetically by a Roberts Court.  Of course, Danforth--the case that effectively precludes such a right--is stare decisis.  And we know how deferential to precedent Roberts claims to be.