The utility of morality (as a thing all its own) can be proven to exist. Take a look at Kant (although Kant was fairly religious, his writings on the Categorical Imperative do a good job of showing in a non-religious way how the metaphysics of ethics work without there needing to be a supreme being who just "makes" it work).

That's a nice way to spin it.

Exactly. Morals are completely made up by men. This guy decides to base his moral code off of a religious being. Other people will base it off of equally flawed ways

No I don't and that's not what he said. He didn't say it's God's plan. Here's his full quote: "I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God," Mourdock said. "And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen."

It is perfectly clear to me that Mourdock is saying the life created from the rape is sacred, not the act of rape.

He said it badly, but Let's break it down:

"life is that gift from God"

"horrible situation of rape"

"when life begins"

"God intended to happen."

What's he is saying is life is a gift from God even when it comes from rape. He's not saying God puts rapists in the path of women to create life, and he isn't saying that God's plan is for women to be raped. He is only talking about what God intents for the child. God loves all children regardless of how they were conceived.

Here is his explanation:

"What I said was, in answering the question form my position of faith, I said I believe that God creates life. I believe that as wholly and as fully as I can believe it. That God creates life," Mourdock said. "Are you trying to suggest that somehow I think that God pre-ordained rape? No, I don't think that. That's sick. Twisted. That's not even close to what I said. What I said is that God creates life."

People are taking this man's words and extrapolating negative intent for political ends. In my opinion they are intentionally misrepresenting him, while knowing what he meant isn't even news worthy.

There`s no spin to it, believe me.

Again, I don't think Mourdock is saying "God intends rapes to happen." I think he's saying "given that a rape has happened, if the woman gets pregnant from that rape, then God intended that pregnancy to happen." In other words, God doesn't have control over whether the rape happens, but He does have control over whether the woman gets pregnant.

I strongly disagree with that position, because I can't imagine that God intends for 30,000 raped women to become impregnated each year, in the USA alone. Do you really believe He intends for all of those raped women to become impregnated?

Fine, here's another source, a report by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (i.e., doctors who provide health care for pregnant women). Two key statements:

"Key findings of the National Violence Against Women survey reveal that there are more than 300,000 rape-related physical assaults against women annually. Approximately 18% of women surveyed reported that they had been the victim of a completed or attempted rape during their lifetime."

"Sexual assault is associated with a risk of pregnancy and contributes to unintended pregnancy in the United States. The national rape-related pregnancy rate is calculated to be 5% per rape among females aged 12-45 years. This would be equivalent to approximately 32,000 pregnancies as a result of rape each year."

It might be shocking to hear that so many women are raped each year, and that almost one in five American women are raped at some point in their life. It's certainly tragic. But those are the facts. And that's why rape-related pregnancy is an important issue.

http://www.acog.org/Resources_And_Publications/Committee_Opinions/Committee_on_Health_Care_for_Underserved_Women/Sexual_Assault

That is possible, but then anything is.  What people don't like about the idea of every single abortion being illegal is that it makes rape that much worse because there's no part of this where the woman gets a choice.  Maybe that baby will change her life for the better, but that should be her decision, not something that the government forces on her in the worst time of her life.  Just seems logical on my end.  Yes it's unfortunate that a human life will never come to be, but rape shouldn't have that added possible punishment added onto it for the victim.  

Well said. Carrying a rape-induced pregnancy to term should be the woman's choice, not something forced on her by the government.

so then when does the child earn human status? at 3 months pregnant,  6 months, 9 months, what about after its born, 1 week, 1 year. when? when does it earn the right to be called human?

humans get pregnant with humans, thats how biology works.