“The percentage of rapes that result in pregnancy is low because the percentage of women who are ovulating at the time of rape is low. The chances of being raped at all, much less at the precise time of ovulation is extremely low. You probably have more risk of getting hit by lightening.
This is so stupid.
You do not need to say any of this to maintain a 100% pro-Life position. It is just not necessary and it HURTS the pro-Life cause.”
That’s the part of all this that’s really frustrating to me. People are making things up and tracking down fringe “scientists” to back an assertion that we don’t need to make. People are going out of their way to make unnecessary arguments that actually end up hurting our cause. Women get pregnant during rapes. It’s relatively rare, but it happens. It doesn’t make any difference for the sake of our arguments whether it happens 4 percent of the time or 2 percent of the time or .2% of the time or whether its marginally less likely to happen than random unprotected sex with a partner. We have to make the same exact argument at the end of the day. Why are people tripping over themselves and resorting to psuedo-science to defend a useless off the cuff remark?
Exactly what I’ve been saying all along. The pro-life position during that situation have NOTHING to do with the chances of pregnancy in that situation. We don’t believe the life of the infant who is innocent should be harmed regardless.
So why bring up this irrelevant argument?`