Let's assume that 5% is in cases of forcible rape and not including other types to muddy the waters.
Second, what in Akin’s mind constitutes legitimate rape? Was he trying to distinguish between forcible rape and statutory rape? If so, that’s a pretty fine distinction, and one that’s really nonsensical even in the argument Akin was trying to make.
Obviously he was trying to make that distinction because we have statutory rape (age issue) and other technical rapes like when pair of drunks engage in sex as neither can consent under law and finally "rape by force or fear" which is the image everyone conjures when hearing the word "rape."
It's obvious he was speaking to last one with his unfortunate, foolish and offensive "legitimate rape" verbiage.
Ironically in Akin's attempt to clarify, rather than assume the word "rape" would be taken as forcible rape, he created the image that there's some legitimate kind of rape.
As an aside, I like how Hot Air and saying 95% of rapes not ending in pregnancy means rapes ending in pregnancy is actually common. Really? In what other realm is a 95% chance considered UNcommon?
“....As an aside, I like how Hot Air and saying 95% of rapes not ending in pregnancy means rapes ending in pregnancy is actually common. Really? In what other realm is a 95% chance considered UNcommon?”
****************************************************************
Well, in this new era where the “morning after pill” is routinely being offered 100% of the time (along with powerful antibiotics and anti-HIV drugs) to victims who report their rapes, I’d be surprised if the percentage is not instead approaching far closer toward 0%. I’ve seen no reliable statistics (whether 1% or 5% or some other figure) on the percentage of non-consentual rape victims who, in the past, became pregnant from that rape.
And folks, please don’t flame me—I’m not making an argument on either side of the question of whether use of the morning after pill results in an “early abortion” or instead in a prevention of pregnancy.