Tebows Make the Wrong Choice for Planned Parenthood, NOW

"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death." (Prov. 14:12)

In the furor that erupted around the Tim Tebow/Focus on the Family SuperBowl commercial that celebrated life, one fact has become painfully clear, one that should shock and outrage all who view all human beings, regardless of age and proximity to the womb, as persons created in the image of God: abortion advocacy groups such as Planned Parenthood are not pro choice; they are pro-abortion.  

There is no other way to interpret Planned Parenthood's bewildering response to the ad which featured the former Heisman Trophy winner, Tim Tebow, and his mother Pam, and their now well-known story of the circumstances surrounding Tim's birth. Planned Parenthood responded with a video of its own featuring two professional athletes which may be viewed here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/03/planned-parenthoods-tim-t_n_448535.html

At least one prominent feminist group, NOW-the National Organization for Women-demanded that CBS pull the ad from the air, placing CBS in its "Media Hall of Shame." Apparently, women such as Pam Tebow are not woman enough for NOW.

It is peculiar how Planned Parenthood, NOW and related groups have taken issue with Pam Tebow's choice. One wonders why the abortion advocacy organization fails to see the irony in its opposition to the ad: Pam Tebow made a choice and chose life. However, in the eyes of Planned Parenthood, Pam Tebow's choice apparently begged for a rejoinder. It could not be left to stand as a positive implementation of "choice." The common-sense conclusion that follows from PP's premises is unmistakable: Every pro-life decision by a woman is a poor choice, one that must be duly rebuffed.  How can this be interpreted as anything less than a pro-abortion view? One does not leave the PP video with the impression that the organization is going to be celebrating Tim Tebow's birthday each year.

But where does PP's logic lead? History helps us and it is not pretty.  It was precisely this perverse form of logic that led in the 1930s to the de-humanization of a particular group of people, a view that, in turn, fueled the ovens at Auschwitz and Treblinka with a goal of eradicating said sub-human group. Similarly, history of a more recent vintage tells the story of a modern-day holocaust that has, under the democratic-sounding rhetoric of "choice," exterminated more than 40,000 persons (and counting) since 1973-a group of persons branded sub-human. To no surprise, given the reality of Genesis 3, historic examples may be multiplied. Indeed, as Solomon wrote so well in Ecclesiastes, there is nothing new under the sun.

As if the video were not a sufficient mechanism to communicate its pro-abortion message, PP further clarified itself with a written statement on the Tebow ad. Carefully couching its language to applaud Pam Tebow for making a choice, any choice, but a choice nonetheless, PP smoothly sought to relegated the issue to that of "decisions women have to make about their health," while strongly condemning Focus on the Family as "anti-abortion" which, thankfully, it is. And, as if public opinion polls determine ethics, PP further upbraided FOF's pro-life message as archaic and out of touch with "mainstream America," which, when referenced by such groups as PP, may be interpreted as a synonym for a continuum that ranges, right to left, from Oprah to Sean Penn to Deepak Chopra. But if the issue is really about "choice" for PP, why not merely applaud Pam Tebow for making a courageous one? Why all the condemnatory language of Focus on the Family? If the undergirding presupposition is not the correctness of a pro-abortion stance, why is PP so exercised? Why does NOW not find a role model in Pam Tebow? Why is CBS shameful when it allows such a clear affirmation of life? Or is there a deeper and more pernicious agenda afoot? No doubt, there is.

One can sense a struggle to restrain a full-release of venom in the wording of PP's release, an excerpt of which reads:

"If Focus on the Family...has its way, millions of women would no longer be able to make important personal medical decisions for themselves and their families when it comes to abortion.  Focus on the Family's long-stated goal is to outlaw abortion except in rare cases when the woman's life is severely at risk. This is an extreme position, which would rob every woman of the ability to make important personal medical decisions for herself and her family. In addition to opposing a woman's ability to make important medical decisions for herself, Focus on the Family also opposes commonsense comprehensive sex education and life-saving stem cell research. The agenda of this organization is far outside the mainstream of American life."

PP's interpretation of polling data is debatable, but the reality that its message is thoroughly pro-abortion is not. The views of the athletes in the PP video has important implications for manhood, a topic Gender Blog will examine later this week.