Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Tim Tebow & The Abortion Debate

For millions of Americans, Florida Gator Tim Tebow is a football star and a positive role model for little kids everywhere. But to a vocal segment of our population, the former Heisman trophy winner has been ruffling some feathers recently. It all started when word got out that Tebow would be featured in a 30-second spot that will run during the upcoming Super Bowl.

The ad will focus on the choice that Tebow's mother made to give birth to him after some doctors suggested that an abortion would be advisable after she contracted a serious illness. As you know, Mrs. Tebow went ahead with the pregnancy and Tim turned out fine.

As I've heard numerous opinions on this issue, I've seen three different perspectives:
1. Tebow should have a right to say what he wants in whatever forum he wants.
2. Tebow has a right to say what he wants but not during something like the Super Bowl.
3. Tebow is a narrow-minded, religious nut for even suggesting that it might be a good thing for women to consider that abortion might not be the best option.
What I've found most interesting about this whole debate is that many individuals that consider themselves "pro-choice" seem to get really upset any time someone advocates that women keep their baby. It doesn't sound that many of them are truly pro-choice. It feels like they are almost angry that Tebow's mom chose to have him and she wants others to consider the same choice. Many of the same people, who are the most staunch proponents of non-censorship, want to censor those that they disagree with.

The reason why I am pro-life is that I believe that abortion is the murder of an innocent human being. And I am not in a small minority. In fact, Americans are nearly evenly split on this issue. As I've said before, I believe that abortion is my generation's slavery. It is a terrible evil that is allowed by our government. Just as many in the South argued that the Civil War was really about states' rights, many pro-choice advocates claim that the abortion debate revolves around the civil rights of women.

The primary "right" that the South was fighting for in the Civil War was the "right" to own human beings and treat them as chattel." The reproductive "rights" that are involved in the abortion debate is the "right" to kill an innocent child within it's mother's womb. You may disagree with my perspective, but I believe that scientific evidence backs up my belief that abortion is murder. Children are the most vulnerable members of our society and to not speak up for them when they can't defend themselves is wrong in and of itself.

But what if children that were about to be aborted could defend themselves. Would that change things? Look at what Stephen Schwartz has to say:
"Suppose, in the encounter between doctor and child [in an abortion], the child won half of the time, and killed the doctor in self-defense—something he would have every right to do. Very few doctors would perform abortions. They perform them now only because of their absolute power over a small, fragile, helpless victim."
So for something that I feel is the greatest evil of my generation, I believe it is totally appropriate for a well-known figure to speak on behalf of children that can't speak for themselves. Over 200,000 people died in Haiti recently and we applauded each star that spoke out on their behalf. Close to 50 MILLION children have been killed in their mother's womb since 1973 in the United States alone! Isn't it fitting, then, that in the midst of one of the most-watched viewing event in American television challenges people to consider this all-important issue?

I appreciate what Scott Maxwell of The Orlando Sentinel said about this as he compares pro-life advocates to civil rights activists:
"I strongly disagree with my friend and colleague, George Diaz, who argued today that the Super Bowl is the wrong time for anyone to press political or social issues. Would one argue that if, 55 years ago, Rosa Parks had wanted to air a PSA for civil rights, that she find some other, “more appropriate” time to do so? (Excuse me, Mrs. Parks, but if you wouldn’t mind just keeping your seat in the back of the bus until we can see if the Giants pull this victory out, that’d be swell. Besides, there’s a really funny commercial involving monkeys and soda coming up.)"
I realize that there are people that will be reading this post that are just as passionate about this issue as myself but on the other end of the spectrum. That's okay. I still consider you a friend. But it doesn't mean that I agree with you. This issue is too important for me to say "to each his own." It is not like the choice between Coke or Pepsi, Nike or Adidas. It involves human life and for that, I will always choose life.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am pro-choice, and see nothing wrong with the ad. I am so happy for Tim Tebow that his mother chose to have her baby. I do, however, remain happy that his mother had the choice.

I believe that protecting the lives and rights of those already born, of a gestation that allows for independent life outside the womb, to be in the best interests of humanity; as opposed to disregarding the lives and rights of those already born in favor of the unborn.

Interesting article. Keep up the good work!

V said...

I applaud Tim Tebow for being bold enough to stand up for his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ in spite of criticism from a lot of people. Not many football players will step out like he has, and on faith for that matter.

We must keep in mind that Abortion is one of those issues that will have no middle ground. I believe strongly that Abortion IS murder, from the stories I have been told from actually women who had an abortion to seeing videos...I don't understand how the government doesn't see it. But this is why we as Christians need to stand our ground about the gospel and sin. We can't be partial, we can't be soft, we have to speak absolute, sound truths.

Thank you for posting this!

Ashley Brewer said...

I had a minor debate with my cousin who is pro-choice and who had also worked for Planned Parenthood. She is upset that an ad like this is going to be run during a time where people are able to come together and that this ad is going to cause people to be divided. Unfortunately, people are already divided because people refuse to see the truth of things. I find it highly unfair that the pro-choice agenda can work behind closed curtains and pro-life advocates are unable to get it all in the open without facing opposition. Pro-Choice advocates are everywhere. They are the first in line in hospitals when there is a minor complication for the mother during her pregnancy to tell her the easiest option is abortion. Planned Parenthood is a main case in point. They are encouraging every which way they can for women to get abortions solely because that is how they make their money. If all these things are allowed to go on behind closed curtains, pro-life activists should be able to bring it out and state contrary positions on it. Especially when it's an interview of a mother who was advised to kill her child because of her sickness. This is the point they are trying to make.

Anytime there is a moment one has to take a stand for Truth, it should be seized . . . And that is what will happen during the most watch show each year. The Truth will be shared.

I've written a blog regarding the founder of Planned Parenhood and I think everyone who supports infanticide should read it.