I was reading the latest headlines like I usually do each morning, and I read a small article about how Planned Parenthood is responding to the Super Bowl ad paid for by Focus on the Family. NFL star Tim Tebow shares in a 30 second commercial, how he is grateful for his mom deciding to not have an abortion. As I read the article (original article) I could not help but question the motives of Planned Parenthood. The motives of Focus on the Family and Tim Tebow are pretty obvious, to encourage pregnant mothers to see through their pregnancy to full term and make a choice to keep the baby or give away for adoption.
Planned Parenthood began as an organization that reached out to poor black communities, and what looked like a pure motive to help. The real mission of Planned Parenthood was to stop the growth of what they considered an "inferior" race. Planned Parenthood would have you believe that Sanger was a hero and a strong woman wanting the best for all women of all races, but this is not entirely true. By the way you can purchase A Nation Adrift on DVD where I source the above statement at the bottom of this post.
I find this whole argument of Planned Parenthood to be rather weak and rooted in profits rather than mission. In this country we have the freedom of speech and the ability to speak out on issues that are both moral and non-moral. The Focus on the Family ad is giving a testimony of a mother who opted for birth rather than abortion, and in essence she made her "choice". Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion groups would have you believe that they are about choice alone, but the fact is that Planned Parenthood would be shutdown if abortion were illegal. THEY MAKE A PROFIT ON THESE PROCEDURES! How can a group who fronts themselves as a activist group for womens rights stand to make a profit off the same women who they coerce to choose abortions.
Now I am not one who would hold signs in front of a clinic, and shout hell-bound passages at the incoming and outgoing clients. I do support a solid 30 second commercial that would air in front of the largest television audience of the year. How can a woman truly choose, when she is bombarded with one-sided messages. Either political party would cry murder if we only educated the people about one political party and then asked them to make a choice at the polls.
Here is an idea! When seniors over 62 years of age apply for a Reverse Mortgage, they have to go through a Reverse Mortgage counseling. How about each woman that applies for an abortion gets an honest two-sided counseling session and must bring the certificate to the pre-op before an abortion can be performed, which states she made an informed decision. The counseling could be performed by Planned Parenthood for pro-abortion information, and the local pregnancy center for pro-life information. Of course the pro-abortion groups would go nuts over that idea and say it is shackling women.
Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said Tebow's story was "compelling," but added that every woman must be able to make important medical decisions for herself and her family. Right… so why is Planned Parenthood fighting abstinence programs in the public schools, asking TV execs to ban this commercial, and paying millions each year to keep lobbying for abortion rights to be extended further than they already are.
So Planned Parenthood responds with a "much" longer video on youtube as a response.
BUY THIS DVD
#1 by 4life on February 4, 2010 - 3:14 pm
Quote
How a KY Senate Bill and a Super Bowl Ad Expose the Truth
As we were heading out the door for a meeting at church one recent Sunday evening, I overheard our 10 year-old daughter telling her 9 year-old brother (in her best parental tone) “Chase, put the football back!” In no uncertain certain terms, she wanted to make it clear to her brother that he shouldn’t bring his football along to the meeting. In case you didn’t know it, younger brothers do not like to be bossed around by their older sisters so I knew an argument was about to ensue. I quickly stepped in and told my daughter not to be so bossy. She replied (without the slightest hint of a smile), “I’m not being bossy; I’m just telling him what to do!”
When I gently pointed out to her that, in fact, telling her brother what to do was the very definition of being bossy, she realized that she was, indeed, guilty as charged. Fortunately, we were all able to laugh about her self-contradictory statement, and good humor was restored to the family unit.
A couple of news items in the last few days reminded me that it isn’t just my daughter who doesn’t always seem to understand the meanings of the words she speaks. The first was the news coverage of Kentucky Senate Bill 38, which requires doctors to show a woman an ultrasound image of her baby and explain how it is developing before performing an abortion. The second was the dust-up over a supposedly controversial ad featuring Florida football great Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam, that is to be shown during the Super Bowl.
The Courier-Journal called requiring a woman to have an ultrasound before killing her baby “a sleazy tactic” and, in what I’m sure they considered to be a stinging rebuke, said that SB 38 was “meant to discourage women from having abortions, no two ways about it.” Well, duh. Of course that is the bill’s intent. But I thought the battle cry among ‘pro-choicers’ was that they wanted abortion to be “safe, legal, and rare”. Maybe they really mean legal and as numerous as possible.
The Tebow ad, according to the group who produced it, shares “a personal story centered on the theme of 'Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.’'' If you don’t know the Tebows’ story, it is a fascinating one. Pam gave birth to Tim despite advice from her doctor to abort because of illness during her pregnancy. Tim grew from a small, sickly child into a Heisman trophy-winning college quarterback. Why is that offensive?
I believe it is for exactly the same reasons that pro-abortion groups so strongly oppose SB38. As columnist Star Parker writes, “Pro-abortionists know that our existing legalized abortion regime can only continue as long as we keep the human face off abortion. It's why ultrasound has revolutionized this world. When young women who have doubts about taking their pregnancy to term see the live child within them, they overwhelming decide to give birth. You don't have to preach. They see that this is life and they know what to do. The Tebow story will put this human face on abortion for the 100 million or so who will watch the Super Bowl. Nothing could be scarier for the culture of death.”
The protests over both SB 38 and the Tebow ad expose the protesters as “pro-abortion” and not simply “pro-choice”. The New York-based Women’s Media Center, in their bid to censor the Tebow ad, called it an “attack on choice”. But, as columnist Matt Barber asks, "In what possible way is it an ‘attack on choice' for a woman to share the tale of how – when given two clearly defined options – she ‘chose' life over abortion? That's choice defined.”
Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women, said she respected the choices made by women such as Pam Tebow but condemned the planned ad as "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning." "That's not being respectful of other people's lives," O'Neill said. "It is offensive to hold one way out as being a superior way over everybody else's."
And that is the real issue, isn’t it? Any discussion like this necessarily brings up the possibility that abortion could actually be ‘wrong’.
Consider this question: Do you know any politician who says they think abortion is a good thing? Senator John Kerry summed up every ‘pro-choice’ politician’s argument this way: “Too many people in America believe that if you are pro-choice that means pro-abortion. It doesn't. I don't want abortion. Abortion should be the rarest thing in the world. I am actually personally opposed to abortion. But I don't believe that I have a right to take what is an article of faith to me and legislate it to other people.”
Now think about that for a moment. If an unborn baby is not alive or not human, why would anyone be against abortion? It would simply be just another elective surgery. But if an unborn baby is a living human, how could anyone be for abortion? The only reason that abortion would be wrong is if it were the taking of an innocent human life…namely murder. (So what ‘pro-choice’ politicians are saying is that, while they understand that abortion is murder, they can’t impose their moral opposition to murder on others. How absurd!)
Back in 1973, when Roe v Wade was tragically decided, it was based in large part on the idea that science couldn’t prove when life began. Now, however, with the advancement in ultrasound and our understanding of genes there is no longer any question scientifically–life begins at conception. Legal abortion is on the wrong side of morality, science and history; the tide of public opinion is turning and those who stand to lose a lot of money know it and are running scared.
I don’t mean to be bossy; I’m just telling you how it is.
Chuck Souder is on staff at Shelby Christian Church. If you have questions or comments for Chuck, he can be reached at csouder@shelbychristian.org
#2 by Joshua Moran on February 4, 2010 - 3:20 pm
Quote
Chuck or 4life, thank you for your post/comment with some good facts. I totally agree and hope the world wakes up to this issue.