First off, because even if Representative-not-Doctor Franks were correct, so what? Wouldn't that circumstance make it even more tragic? Or is the subtext here that women tend to a lie about the circumstances of their pregnancy, so let's assume that there was no actual rape involved? He's certainly not making the at-least-ideologically-coherent argument that the origin of conception doesn't change the intrinsic value of the unborn, since he's using the frequency of pregnancy from rape to argue against a rape/incest abortion exception.
Second off, because it's not correct, and GOP Rep. Trent Franks is a dolt on multiple levels.
But he's a dolt that has been regularly reelected since 2002, and currently serves as representative for the 8th District of Arizona (northwest 'burbs of Phoenix), where he has one of the most conservative records in congress (per http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/trent_franks/400141), and there's no indication that he's in any local political trouble for his statements. Even though he's now walking back the statement (http://bit.ly/13Kxm5U), claiming he actually meant that it was really rare for women who were pregnant from rape (as if that ever happens, sheesh) to seek abortion after the 20th week, so why on earth would you allow an exception for it?
Which also makes no sense, but, hey, I have no doubt he'll still win re-election next year.
Not This Crap Again: Republican Trent Franks Says Pregnancy From Rape Is Rare
…Didn't the republicans not only "get a memo" figuratively about this in the last election cycle, but also actually write a REAL memo to its elected officials telling them to STFU about rape?
Yes, but that seems to have much more of a national impact than a local one, and Rep. Franks apparently believes his local GOP base will continue to support him even despite such occasional gaffes.
Dave, I am amused that you believe that facts matter to anyone in the GOP.