And I'm not ignoring the one percent. But using 1% of abortion cases to justify 100% of abortion cases is a logical fallacy. Those are two separate issues. We can talk about sexual assault or we can talk about abortion. When you bring up such a small percentage of something to argue for the whole you are not actually arguing for a special solution for that percentage, you are saying "because there are occasional cases of women who have been raped seeking an abortion, elective abortion should be available for everyone for whatever reason" and that's a dishonest way to argue for abortion. That's my point. That's like me arguing that you should never drink water because some water isn't safe to drink.
Oh I’m not using it to justify it, I made it pretty clear that I’m for abortions in any case but I brought it up because you seem extremely ignorant about SA in general and how victims go about it. I’m bringing it up because you seem all too willing to gloss over it and you still do even though love claiming you don’t. I’m saying that if you use some critical thinking and apply the logic we already know ( the logic being that most SA is not reported, most is also done by family member/friend ) and how poorly rape cases are handled and the difficulty there is to prove them.
That you would know that 1% is not accurate either because most victims would not admit to it and hospitals can not report it because it’s both a violation of privacy and a pretty bad way to sample, since most rapes do not cause injuries requiring medical attention.
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system
https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv16.pdf
https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsarp00.pdf
Here are some links to that shows how underreported SA is by the way since you questioned in another ask how we know SA is underreported. Of course you can always do a deeper dive on your own, there’s plenty of information about SA online.
You only think I'm ignorant about it because you are so bad at understanding what you read and following the conversation.
Once again, you don't understand what we're talking about. We're not talking about the number of sexual assault cases in general. We're talking about the number of abortions that happen due to sexual assault. The 1% number is the best estimate we have. We can't just pretend the number is a lot bigger because of the issue of sexual assault being underreported.
This isn't about sexual assault being underreported. That's a different conversation. The issue of the percentage of abortions due to sexual assault is what we're talking and none of the points you brought up or the links you share have anything to do with that discussion.
The Guttmacher Institute is a pro-choice organization and they did the stats. You can't just say that's not correct and expect your word to be enough. What credentials do you have to refute that percentage?
If we were talking about the percentage of sexual assault cases that are reported then your message would make sense and we could address those things, but that's not we're talking about. What is your evidence that more than 1% of abortions are due to sexual assault?
But even if the 1% number wasn't correct and it was higher, the chances that it's significantly higher are slim to none. So either way, it's still the minority of abortion cases and my point would still stand.
I don't even know how bad your reading comprehension has to be to see the statistic that tells us less than 1% of abortions are due to sexual assault and translate that into some kind of claim about the percentage of sexual assault cases that are reported to the police or whatever. You didn't prove the research from the Guttmacher Institute wrong. You just proved you don't understand what we're talking about.