[Valpal1]

Common sense would say that a rape exception is unnecessary for minors under the age consent. One of the main purposes of statutory rape and age of consent laws is to prevent pregnancy in minors who are too physically immature to give birth safely.

So all pregnancies resulting from statutory rape whether assault or consensual would (or could) be covered by statute by a health exception, making a rape exception redundant.

The pregnant twelve year old rape victim example is a straw man argument and does nothing to support the argument that a rape exception is necessary to protect the “chilrun”.

[Just mythoughts]

Common sense would say that a rape exception is unnecessary for minors under the age consent. One of the main purposes of statutory rape and age of consent laws is to prevent pregnancy in minors who are too physically immature to give birth safely. So all pregnancies resulting from statutory rape whether assault or consensual would (or could) be covered by statute by a health exception, making a rape exception redundant. The pregnant twelve year old rape victim example is a straw man argument and does nothing to support the argument that a rape exception is necessary to protect the “chilrun”.

Plain English please. Would the Akin agenda require a 12 year old to give birth under any statue or health exemption?