You may be inclined to believe it, but there is no scientific evidence supporting this. A study cited by the CDC showed a conception rate of 5% in women who were raped, with an estimated 32,000 rape related pregnancies. Further, this study reports estimates of 2000 to 5000 children born of rapes during the Rwandan ethnic cleansing. Any physiologic explanation you care to give for why the "natural defense" you mention didn't work there?
And there are studies that show a pregnancy rate of .5% from forcible rape. I can also point you to studies that show global warming is real and studies that show it is not. But I do know FOR A FACT that a woman has biological defends against foreign sperm when she is in a loving relationship with an active sexual partner. It seems to me all this man did was state the pro-life position, which BTW I am not in 100% agreement with. But if conservatives are going to defend liberal PC talking points I don’t think there is much hope for the future. Is what he said true? Well it might every well be true and I am not willing to hang someone on a maybe, particularly a non PC maybe.
What definition of rape are they using? Akin is talking about a specific kind of sexual assault.
One has to wonder how they came up with this number because the Hutus weren't raping, they were murdering. If they were raped, then how many of these were already pregnant before the rapes began, and the statisticians are just assuming the pregancies came from the rape.