I take it you missed the whole "Abstinance only education doesn't work." part. Also, "keep your legs closed" is usually directed specifically at women. While I'll assume best case scenario, that you meant it at both men and women, I would like to repeat: Women don't get pregnant on their own.
Also @JDavidC I do applaud(although still disagree) your stance on pro-life, since it is one of the more nuanced and reasonable approaches to abortion I've ever seen. The problem is that(at least here in the US) most pro-lifers aren't like that.
Many people have an attitude that goes something along the lines of "Oh, you got knocked up? well tough bananas, now raise that baby you irresponsible ****. An abortion? No way, you made a mistake now pay for the consequences."
Now this doesn't sit well with me for a few reasons. 1) We don't know the circumstances that led up to the abortion. 2) Everyone seems to magically forget that women don't get pregnant on their own. 3) The baby is used as a punishment for percieved(or maybe even actual) irresponsibility.(Which is especially horrible considering that if the baby's life is so sacred, then why is it being used as a punishment.) 4)These same people who so adamantly want you to not abort the baby don't want to adopt children themselves 5) These same people who are so pro-life, don't really want to help the mother access health-care and hate government welfare programs such as WIC (considering that economic status might be part of the reason these women are getting abortions.) (
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/21/north-dakota-abortion-_n_2926858.html a quote from the article -Hawken said she has introduced bills during her 17 years in office that she considers to be "pro-life," such as a prenatal care for minors bill and a bill ensuring quality childcare for single moms, but those were rejected by her colleagues. "It seems like we want to get [babies] here," she said, "but we don't care if they're healthy once they get here. That's just bad policy." 6) There isn't this realization that that baby you saved is eventually going to be someone's neighbor. Sure you "saved it's ife, but for what? To put it in an abusive household? To put it in a household that can't afford it (wether you are comfortable admitting it or not, babies are expensive)? To put it in the adoption system where it might or might not get adopted? Where if it does it means that some other kid didn't get adopted. This isn't some imaginary kid whose life you saved, this is an actual living breathing human being who's existence has consequences. If we're forcing parents to have children they don't want, we're not exactly putting that kid on the path to become a contributing member of society. Yes it's a cold, detached way of looking at things, but it's valid none the less.
7) This is a specific instnce of number 5. If we're going to force a woman to bear a child that's the product of rape, I hope we're also willing to pay for years of counseling for the mother and for years of counseling for the child once he learns about how he was concieved. These so called pro-life people wouldn't be so thrilled at the prospect of that.