Whoa nelly.
As Joe Jervis points out, we’ve been hearing the propaganda for weeks now about how Tim Tebow’s mother was confronted with a difficult pregnancy, encouraged to have an abortion, and made the heroic and courageous choice to carry the pregnancy to term, so that her son Tim would one day sport Bible verses in his eyeblack and have a really hard time at NFL tryouts. As you all know, the propaganda has become even fiercer as Focus on the Family has spent $2.5 million on an anti-choice ad to be aired during the Super Bowl featuring Tebow’s story.
Yeah, well, Gloria Allred begs to differ:
In her exclusive interview with RadarOnline.com Allred slams the ad and CBS’s decision to air it, pointing out factual inconsistencies with Pam’s story. One glaring one is the fact that the act of abortion is totally illegal in the majority Catholic country of the Philippines – under all circumstances including rape and incest, and even without a provision in the circumstance that the mother’s life is in danger. The law has been in effect since 1930.
Allred says she believes it an impossible scenario to believe that [Filipino] doctors would [have] ever suggested abortion as a viable option for Tebow in the first place. And when you learn that physicians and midwives who perform abortions in the Philippines face six years in prison, and may have their licenses suspended or revoked, and that women who receive abortions – no matter the reason – may be punished with imprisonment for two to six years, it’s easy to see why.
Oh boy! You see, Ms. Tebow is being hailed as a hero for “choosing life.” Let’s get something out of the way before we move on. When Focus on the Family and other anti-choice groups raise women like Sarah Palin, like Pam Tebow, onto pedestals for “choosing life,” they are ceding the pro-choice argument, that women should be the ones to decide what to do with their bodies. They don’t realize it, and it’s not pointed out nearly enough, but they’re arguing by pro-choice parameters. In the dreams of anti-choice conservatives, in a fantasy-land where Roe v. Wade has been overturned, no woman is a hero for making that choice, because under draconian abortion bans, the only choice women have is to abide by the law or to seek reproductive health care through other, possibly unsafe means.* As an American living in the Philippines, Pam Tebow found herself in the same situation. There are no exceptions to Filipino abortion law. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, abortion in the Philippines is
unsafe, potentially deadly and highly stigmatized. Every year, more than 500,000 women in the country try to terminate their pregnancies. In 2008 alone, criminal abortions resulted in the deaths of at least 1000 women and 90,000 more suffered complications.
So, that was the “choice” Pam Tebow had to make. Jodi Jacobson at RH Reality Check expands on this:
During a bible study class, Pam Tebow related that “during that pregnancy, a Philippine doctor suggested that she abort the fetus because the strong medications she was being treated with for amoebic dysentery, which she had contacted early in the pregnancy, could cause serious disabilities to the fetus.”
Suggested that she abort the pregnancy? Or laid out the various risks that were possible, leaving her to her own judgment and choices? Made a definitive judgment that the fetus would unquestionably be harmed? Or described the risks of the medication necessary to treat the dysentery, including possible risks to the fetus? All of these are very different scenarios than the ones earlier suggested.
(…)
So…was Tebow’s doctor ignorant of the law and policy of his or her own country? Or, was the doctor willing to skirt the law for a relatively wealthy (in the context of the extreme poverty in the Philippines) white woman from the United States? Or did the doctor, again, merely lay out the range of options should it be found that the possible risks of a medication or the possible side effects of the medication should she opt to take it?
Pam Tebow is making a name for herself, and presumably a lot of money, as an anti-choice activist. But considering what’s coming to light, simply by analyzing a few names, dates and places in her account, I think it may be fair to say that for her to portray herself as some sort of “hero” is a joke. In fact, Pam Tebow’s own account, when bolstered by the necessary background information, is actually a fairly strong defense for the justice contained in Roe v. Wade. If she had been in the United States, she could have made the very same choice to go through with a risky pregnancy, having weighed her options, and having analyzed the pros and cons of her specific situation. But yet she and Focus on the Family are advocates for taking those rights away from other women!
And if I may be quite frank: women deal with difficult pregnancies all the time. By all accounts, Pam Tebow’s pregnancy was not off the charts when it comes to danger or risk. Women every day deal with more painful, more difficult choices in pregnancy, than what she went through. I don’t mean to negate her experience, but on this day, as the guilty-on-all-counts verdict came down against American terrorist Scott Roeder for his assassination of Dr. George Tiller, who before his death was the foremost American specialist in treating women in ghastly situations that none of us would wish on our worst enemies, it’s important to realize what these anti-choice advocates wish to take away. The testimonials of Tiller’s patients, so many of whose experiences are the true definition of going to hell and back, bear out the reality of what Pam Tebow and Focus on the Family seek to take away from American women. Those testimonials are tough reading. I recommend them, with boxes of tissue handy. And then ask yourself how grotesque it is that a woman like Ms. Tebow is steamrolling all over those very real experiences on her newfound crusade, enabled by the coattails of her teary-eyed football-playing son and the insipid demagogues at Focus on the Family.
Jodi Jacobson concludes her piece with these words:
Each woman is unique; each situation is unique; each woman acting as a moral agent on behalf of herself, and her family, with her medical advisors or whomever she chooses to engage has the right and the need to exercise these choices in the moment in her life such choices are relevant and based on her own “celebration of life.”
And on this the vast majority of Americans agree.
Pam Tebow is no “hero.” She’s simply a woman who may or may not have made a difficult choice. Regardless, things turned out well. And she may be lying. Questions!
For her part, Gloria Allred is threatening to sue CBS if they run the misleading ad:
Allred warns, “If this ad airs and fails to disclose that abortions were illegal at the time Ms. Tebow made her “choice”, then I intend to file a formal complaint of misleading advertising with those federal commissions.”
On a final note Allred says that she hopes that if any of the women that watch the ad are in the position of evaluating their own pregnancy options, that they “get all the facts before you make a decision. Don’t let any other person influence you. You are going to live with the consequences of that choice for the rest of your life. Make sure it’s your choice and you feel confident you can live with that choice for the rest of your life.”
We’ll be watching closely to see what CBS does, now that this new information is seeing sunlight.
*Including those women who end up having to choose to terminate a wanted pregnancy due to threats to their health or their very lives. And we do know, through years of research, that abortion bans don’t reduce abortion rates anyway. They simply make abortion more dangerous, healthcare worse, etc.










The goal of the anti-choice and/or anti-gay “movement” is to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else. If we want to see a glimpse of the future should these Christian Taliban obtain power in the US, look no further than Uganda where, thanks to interference from US militant anti-gay activists, death will be the result of anyone who dares to question the “party line.”
CBS should not run this ad in the first place in light of their past refusal to run an ad from a pro-equality church. CBS is showing an ugly radical conservative bias by snubbing the religious liberty of pro-equality Americans while promoting the pseudo-religion of those equating denying choice with the love of Christ.
No, the info you parroted from Allred, Jacobson, etc., is bogus. Pam Tebow is not the joke. Folks lying through the teeth to slam her are the joke- they make themselves look deceitful, spiteful, vindictive, etc., by stooping this low to resort to character assassination over an ad they have no idea what it says.
Here’s the lie: “There are no exceptions to Filipino abortion law.”
Here’s the rebuttal:
http://www.asap-asia.org/country-profile-philippines.html
“although the Penal Code does not list specific exceptions to the general prohibition on abortion, under the general criminal law principles of necessity as set forth in article 11(4) of the Code, an abortion may be legally performed to save the pregnant woman’ life.2 A decision of the Supreme Court also impliedly recognized abortion to save the mother’ life.3 The United Nations recognizes that abortion in the Philippines is permitted only in instances in which the pregnant woman’s life is endangered.”
Like I said there is zero evidence Pam Tebow lied.
But you, Jacobson, Allred, all the diehard abortionisd propagandaists have exposed yourselves as the ones lying.
Shame on you for this tactic.
Hum, so you show me where it says that Pam Tebow’s life was threatened.
Nice pivot, though. It’s almost like you had an argument. I’m sure you’re the expert though. I mean, it’s not like Gloria Allred is one of the most accomplished attorneys in the nation or anything.
Good evening, troll.
Also, way to not quote the paragraph directly after the ones you quoted from that link, the ones that hurt your case:
“This silence of the law on any exception, even if to save the mother’ life, however, may have a chilling effect to medical practitioners and thus imperil women’ lives.
Nonetheless, despite the restrictive legal regime, abortion is widely resorted to by women faced with unplanned pregnancies and while they are arrested by police and maltreated by medical practitioners, women, however, rarely get prosecuted.”
And again, nighty night, troll.
Anyone that tries to assassinate the Tebow’s character is walking into the biggest mistake they could possibly make for their cause.
Anyone that knows ANYTHING about this family knows how incredibly classy they are. I consider myself as cynical as anyone.. and have no party ties and am not political in anyway.. but I can tell you from what I have seen these are some of the finest people to ever live. You may be doing more damage to your cause than you can possibly fathom by taking this stance against Pam and Tim.. especially for what will likely amount to a completely innocuous commercial with a heart warming story about the value of human life — not an anti abortion commercial.
Um, it’s a Focus on the Family ad. It’s obviously about abortion. That’s their entire angle. Have you not been paying attention?
Evan wrote: 4.Also, way to not quote the paragraph directly after the ones you quoted from that link, the ones that hurt your case:
“This silence of the law on any exception, even if to save the mother’ life, however, may have a chilling effect to medical practitioners and thus imperil women’ lives.
Me: Nice spin. Regardless, the proof is there that the law in that country does indeed allow abortion in the case of mother’s life in danger. Allred and the abortionists LIE.
And you support that.
And look up the facts for yourself where Tebow’s mom had life threatening issues with her pregnacy.
Call me troll what you want but the abortionists are caught red-handed lying to smear the Tebows.
1) If abortions are illegal in the Philippines, then did Ms. Tebow take the initiative to seek out a doctor or midwife who would perform an abortion? If so, it was Tebow who made the choice to inquire about the procedure, not the unsolicited advice of a doctor. If this was the case, she weighed her options, a right she wants to strip from other women.
2) What is the name of this alleged doctor and where is he/she currently practicing? Ms. Tebow should disclose this information, so the practitioner can confirm her claim or mount a defense against a lie. There is no coherent reason why she cannot disclose the name.
3) The act (abortion) is criminalized by the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, which was enacted in 1930 but remains in effect today. Articles 256, 258 and 259 of the Code mandate imprisonment for the woman who undergoes the abortion, as well as for any person who assists in the procedure, even if they be the woman’s parents, a physician or midwife. Article 258 further imposes a higher prison term on the woman or her parents if the abortion is undertaken “in order to conceal [the woman's] dishonor”.
There is no law in the Philippines that expressly authorizes abortions in order to save the woman’s life; and the general provisions which do penalize abortion make no qualifications if the woman’s life is endangered. It may be argued that an abortion to save the mother’s life could be classified as a justifying circumstance (duress as opposed to self-defense) that would bar criminal prosecution under the Revised Penal Code. However, this has yet to be adjudicated by the Philippine Supreme Court.
Punisher, the type of pregnancy Tebow had is not life threatening. Unless you’ve got some proof that she had a life threatening pregnancy you’re just another lying partisan.
Ms. Tebow’s tale does, indeed sound suspicious. And if there is one thing we know, fundamentalists love magic stories of transformation, even if they are not true. In fact, the entire “ex-gay” industry is built on fake stories that often set a compelling narrative, but are left factually wanting. Here is one example of an “ex-gay” fairy tale that recently unraveled in real time.
http://www.truthwinsout.org/news/2007/12/310/
If Ms. Tebow is not telling the truth, perhaps she thought she could get away with it because the alleged incident took place overseas.
However, the truth almost always seeps out. Remember how the military tried to conceal how Pat Tillman died? They too made up a heroic story in a far away land that misled the public. But, even the military PR machine could not hide the truth forever.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman
Word of warning: You can’t put a high profile ad on the Super Bowl and think no one will investigate. If her story checks out, than all is well for Focus on the Family.
However, if it turns out to be a hoax (and it already smells of possible con job) it will destroy this right wing organization. They will have lost their founder, James Dobson, who is leaving the group, and their credibility at roughly the same time. Focus on the Family will not survive this double catastrophe in a time of deep recession, when they are already laying off employees.
Focus, you better fact check get this one right before it airs. You aren’t dealing with gullible fundies this time and will suffer great shame if this is a hoax. People will forgive you if you pull the ad — but once it airs, your honor is on the line. And once your name is soiled – it is almost impossible to recover.
[...] this site, Evan Hurst wrote about new suspicions that Tim Tebow’ mother, Pam, may be fudging her story about defying a [...]
[...] Pretty interesting, don’t you think? An entire media mythology has grown up around the noble missionary who carried her child to term against a doctor’s advice, and the child grows up to become a devout Christian and football star. [...]
You quote Jodi Jacobson. She’s a riot!
Here’s her response to me (see her comments at RH Reality) when I asked if she was aware that Pam’s reported medical issue was a placental abruption.
According to Jodi:
“Nowhere in the continuously varying stories apparently told by the Tebows has placental disruption been mentioned except for your reference to Tim Tebow’s bio, to which you also do not link.”
But as I pointed out to Jodi, they are sooo easy to find!! Why I found the details at:
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20071007/NEWS/710060317?p=2&tc=pg
and here:
http://www.tebowzone.com/about/
and OMG here’s another!!:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/15/home-schooling-breaking-records-stereotypes/
But the funniest part is when Jodi (in the same post in which she denies that Pam’s placental abruption is reported anywhere) gives us this gem:
“However, if it were placental disruption, it seems to make it even less likely that a physician in the Philippines, unless they were not a very good physician, would in that stage suggest an abortion unless in fact it was clear the baby would be stillborn and even then given law and policy there, i am not convinced this would be the case. I would think that a physician would put Mrs. Tebow in the hospital and wait it out, monitoring mother and baby as is suggested by, for example, the Mayo Clinic. Without such care, placental abruption would likely kill both the mother and the fetus. ”
But if Jodi had done the slightest bit of research, she would know that Pam’s doctors expected the baby would be stillborn.
Jodi obviously has CHOSEN to have no clue what she’s talking about, so its very revealing that you choose to quote her.
Anyways, Carry on…. It’s so very entertaining!!!
Okay, except all of that testimony comes from Pam Tebow herself. The Rev. Moonie Times link is an editorial which lifts the testimonial from the Tebowzone site almost verbatim.
That’s the point…her integrity is being called into question, because her story doesn’t match up with the laws of the country where she was at the time.
So, if all we have is Pam Tebow’s word, then…you know…why trust it? Because she’s a Christian? Because in my experience, fundamentalist Christians are the most shameless liars on the planet.
I’m sorry that you think your people are honest, but there’s no reason to believe it at face value, because fundamentalist Christianity is devoid of integrity.
OK Evan, you say
“her integrity is being called into question, because her story doesn’t match up with the laws of the country where she was at the time. ”
What’s ironic to me, is how Jodi Jacobson, while still doubting a placental abruption took place, and while defending Gloria allred’s argument relates the only circumstances under which she believes a Philipino doctor would perform an abortion.
Jodi writes “unless in fact it was clear the baby would be stillborn”. It so happens, that that is exactly what the Tebow’s consistently report. above all, the claim that doctors expected her baby to be stillborn is absolutely key. If the baby dies in-utero, maternal risk is significantly increased – but don’t take my word for it, here’s a more objective source.
http://www.glowm.com/?p=glowm.cml/section_view&articleid=122
(From the Global Library of Women’s Medicine)
Abruptio placentae must be included among the most dangerous of obstetrical complications, with hazardous implications for mother and infant. For both, the total morbidity and mortality are determined by the severity of the separation, prematurity of the fetus, amount of blood lost, and degree of difficulty in the delivery process.
The following are the principal maternal complications associated with premature separation of the placenta: (1) hemorrhagic shock resulting from acute whole blood loss and resultant contraction of the intravascular compartment; (2) generalized coagulopathy occurring because of active consumption of clotting factors within the vascular tree and consequent secondary fibrinolysis; (3) ischemic necrosis of distant organs. The organs most frequently involved are the kidneys and the anterior pituitary gland. Acute renal failure is a serious complication and may lead to maternal death; and (4) preterm PROM resulting from decidual hemorrhage.
A recent study examining maternal outcome after abruptio placentae found that women presenting with a stillborn infant on admission were more likely to require transfusions and have complications, such as DIC and acute renal failure, than women presenting with a live fetus.127
So I doubt Pam Tebow, is lying as this site suggests. She certainly presents a scenario under which a Philipino doctor might suggest termination of pregnancy.
If the fetus died in utero, the fetus would be DEAD. Surgical proceedires to remove an already dead fetus are not and never have been considered abortions.
What’ sick, though, John, is that anti-choice groups (the actual anti-life people in this debate), in their zealotry, have actually called those procedures into question in their obsession with going after the women who have to have late-term abortions, the ones who are carrying wanted pregnancies, but who run into terrible medical problems none of us would wish on our worst enemies, and have to make the painful choice to terminate. And these lying, sanctimonious ghouls have made those women Public Enemy #1 and they’ve murdered the foremost doctor in the nation who treated those women in their time of need.
The anti-Tebow slams falls apart for these reasons: 1) 21 percent of illegal abortions annually out of hundreds of thousands performed are done by doctors. That disprove the notion no doctor would risk their careers and being imprisoned in that country, 2) while the law in itself may be strict, prosecution is RARE for illegal abortions (in other words, if a law so strict is not enforced most of the time, it is almost as good as having no law at all), 3) according to UN report on the Philippines, abortion is indeed allowed in the case of mother’s life in danger, so if that is true, nothing illegal was involved if a doctor suggested abortion if Mrs. Tebow’s life was in danger.
Those who slam Mrs. Tebow leave out a lot of these facts that totally invalidate their slams and smearings.
The UN info here:
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/abortion/doc/philippines.doc
ABORTION POLICY
Grounds on which abortion is permitted:
To save the life of the woman Yes
To preserve physical health No
To preserve mental health No
Rape or incest No
Foetal impairment No
Economic or social reasons No
Available on request No
Although the Penal Code does not list specific exceptions to the general prohibition on abortion, under the general criminal law principles of necessity as set forth in article 11(4) of the Code, an abortion MAY BE LEGALLY PERFORMED to save the pregnant woman’ life.
Despite the severity of the law, abortion appears to be widely practised in the Philippines as a means of birth control and is rarely prosecuted.
The International Planned Parenthood Federation reports estimates ranging from 155,000 to 750,000 induced abortions PER YEAR.
In a context of poor health conditions and widespread malnutrition, and where some 76 per cent of deliveries occur at home and only 21 PER CENT are attended by a PHYSICIAN, induced abortions are poorly performed and result in high maternal mortality and morbidity.
Since the Tebows are involved in multimillion-dollar ad campaign, the burden is upon THEM to substantiate their claims with more than anecdotal piety and the “trust us because we’re Christian” meme.
Millions of Christians have discovered that the conservative anti-life movement relies heavily upon lies, obfuscation, and false piety. That’s one reason (among several) why the pro-choice movement remains strong and abortion remains legal in the United States.
it was to terminate a fetus harmed by drugs
NOT SAVE THE MOTHER’s life
you pathetic lying christians
Pam Tebow said herself that she was advised to abort because the baby was likely harmed not because it endangered her life so this “her life was in danger” bit doesn’t fly.
Exactly.
“Anyone that knows ANYTHING about this family knows how incredibly classy they are. I consider myself as cynical as anyone.. and have no party ties and am not political in anyway.. but I can tell you from what I have seen these are some of the finest people to ever live. You may be doing more damage to your cause than you can possibly fathom by taking this stance against Pam and Tim.. especially for what will likely amount to a completely innocuous commercial with a heart warming story about the value of human life ‚Äî not an anti abortion commercial.”
Hmm. Let me paraphrase. “I am not cynical or partisan, and I have no opinion on the abortion issue. But the Tebows are the bestest, most awesomest people that on the face of the earth. EVER. And I support their pro-life views.”
Hey, Mrs. Tebow, er I mean, charlie, a little intellectual honesty never hurt, ok?
“Anyone that knows ANYTHING about this family knows how incredibly classy they are.”
Yes, and we all thought Tiger Woods was a good family man a few weeks ago. Why are people so gullible and believe appearances when it comes to public figures?
I have no problem with anyone’s view that abortion is a bad choice, but I do have a problem with anyone thinking they have a right to make that choice for others while doing their own superior dance.
I love how half the people here are resorting to some ad hominum attacks, one of the signs of a weak argument and/or arguer. Anyway, from what I’ve read about the ad, it’s not anti-choice or pro-life, it’s simply the Tebows trying to encourage people to make wise choices.
What people don’t seem to think about is that Pam Tebow could very well have left the country if she’d wanted to have abortion. If I understand correctly, abortion was legal in the US then.
Wayne, please don’t try to use Tiger Woods in comparison with the Tebows. They’ve been missionaries to foreign countries for years (if not decades) and have more than proven that they aren’t putting up a false front like Tiger did. People just assumed he was a good guy ’cause he hadn’t been proven wrong since he hid his evil deeds well.
This whole thing is a mess
If you think a Focus on the Family ad featuring a football player whose entire buzz is built around the fact that Mommy didn’t abort him (I mean, he’s failing miserably in NFL tryouts b/c he’s not that good) is not anti-choice, I have a bridge to sell you.
Also, it’s “ad hominEm.”
My mother didn’t abort me either, despite my own medical issues.
So what??
I don’t go on national television and waste $5 million on ads pretending to be better than everyone else, as Tim Tebow and FOTF do.
There is nothing “classy” about such shameless self-promotion.
Plus, it’s bad logic, since Tebow could have just as easily grown up to be homosexual.
The reality, to me, is both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice factions are pure ridiculous that there is NO middle ground. We have children living in this country who are homeless; raped, abused and neglected…and yet we continue to go on and on over who gets to choose life; what it makes them, etc.,
Personally, I wonder how many Pro=lifers are concerned about out service people..where were they when they were marching off to death? Do they help those young, poor and under-educated women who have 3, 4 and 5 children with the upbringing or education so that they don’t live in poverty??? NO…
How about finding a common ground and stop promoting some religious agenda….whomever; whatever faction you are a party too.
By allowing themselves to be used by Focus on the Family as part of an anti-choice campaign, they have called into question the selfless sacrificing public front they developped for themselves by their missionary work for the last few decades. They have jumped feet first into the culture wars.
Also, American missionaries to foreign countries aren’t always forces for good. So, the fact they were missionaries doesn’t predispose me to having a positive view of the Tebows. Far more important to me would be what they did while missionaries.
G. Basimane: There is no common ground on reproductive rights between pro-choicers and anti-choicers.
Pro-life groups lie when they say they’re concerned about life. The only group that is actually “pro-life” is pro-choice people. Pro-choice people support women throughout whatever decisions they want to make. This is why every “common ground” initiative ends up failing. When one side actively promotes the lie that the other side supports a genocide worse than the Holocaust, there is no common ground to be found.
“Do they help those young, poor and under-educated women who have 3, 4 and 5 children with the upbringing or education so that they don’t live in poverty??? NO…”
A lie on your part. Pro-lifers are the ones who set up charities, shelters, food drives, etc., etc., all over the country to help women, children, the poor, etc., out. Not to mention work done all over the world for the same reasons.
The fact that the Tebows exist and do medical work overseas to help others disprove your lie pro-lifers don’t care about those who are out of the womb.
Nah, Punisher, you’re just making s**t up.
I’m not saying that pro-lifers never do any good, but Planned Parenthood does more to prevent abortion than all the pro-life organizations combined. Fact. Backed up by numbers.
Oh, and isn’t daddy Tebow a preaching missionary? That’s not charity work. That’s proselytizing.
@Evan. A few questions for you:
1). How do pro-lifers “lie” as you put it? Unlike some with the “win at any cost” mentality, it is against my beliefs to lie. Same for the people I run with.
2). The majority of charities are run by people with convictions and most of these people happen to be “religious.” If the pro-death people want to start a charity (food shelf/orphanage/missionary, etc), go right ahead.
4). You always claim it’s the Christian Taliban that’s against abortion, but do you realize that the Buddhists, Mormons, Catholics, followers of Islam, Hindus, Scientologists, and most of the rest of the world realize that you cannot kill your offspring and survive? If you’re paying attention, none of those groups are “Christian.”
3). Now that the ad has come out, don’t you guys feel a bit foolish with all of your hate-filled comments? No, because you sure LOOK foolish.
It looks to me like you guys were pawned by Focus on the Family and the Tebows.
Pro-lifers lie when they say they’re concerned with life because they support only the kind of life that they can project their insecurities and biases onto. The braindead vegetable Terri Schiavo. Fetuses. They don’t support the women as human, sexual beings.
You’ll have to come up with some numbers on the idea that most charities are religious. I think you’re making things up or just spitting out what you’ve always been taught.
Buddhists do not have such a strict position on abortion. I’m really not too interested in what the Mormons think. But for you to say that Mormons and Catholics aren’t Christian is the height of insipid fundamentalist Christian (unmerited, intelligence-free) arrogance.
And no, I don’t feel foolish at all, because I believe, from reading the Christian sources, that the entire point was to make an ad that people looked at and said “is that it?” It allows insipid, dishonest groups like FotF to more slyly insert their anti-family, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-human message into peoples’ lives.
Anti-family, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-human message. That’s just rich.
While I don’t have numbers of religious vs. non-religious charities, it is a proven fact that the “religious” (and I HATE that term) do indeed give more to charities than those who are not.
And while I was not stating that the Buddists, Muslims, Catholics, Hindus, et al have official stances against abortion (some do, some do not), my point was that the majority of the followers of those “religions” are against abortion, not the “Christian Taliban” as it is so often claimed.
And yes, the Mormons are a cult. The Catholics are the largest cult in the world. So are so many other groups like the Scientologists, etc. So it’s arrogant to call a spade a spade? Meh.
Regarding the ad, it indeed did make all of the anti-life groups look foolish. Planned Parenthood, N.O.W., and the others were in such an uproar before the ad aired that it makes you look hateful after the fact.
I know, how dare someone choose life. For shame!
Fundamentalist Christianity is also a cult, dear.
Why do you hate the term religious? It’s what you are.
Don’t give me that silly nonsense about how Christianity is “different” from other religions, how it’s a “faith.” That’s just one of the meaningless things fundamentalists tell each other to convince themselves that their religion is right.
And no, it doesn’t make us look hateful. We were correct. FotF had to lie about their message to make it palatable.
There wouldn’t have been an ad if women didn’t HAVE a choice. That’s the point. That’s why we’re the real pro-life ones. We support the rights of women to live and thrive, and to make their own decisions on what’s best for their bodies and their lives. Women are fully functioning breathing people with lives.
It’s beyond me how you people think that a clump of cells should have more rights than more than half the population of actual people.
But then again, the pro-life movement is about misogyny at its heart.
Focus on the Family had to lie? Where is the lie? The only lie I see is what you’re saying about Focus.
The fact that the majority of abortions are because of convenience seems to be lost on you. There are very, very few done to “save a life.” My wife was in a situation similar to the Tebow family. Her doctor told us to abort our son or else my wife AND my son would die. They told us my son wouldn’t live past the 10th week. After he made it past the 10th, then they changed it to the 20th, and so on.
The doctor was wrong, just like the Tebow’s doctor was wrong. How many other people have killed their babies because they believed the doctors were right?
Way too many.
For the record, I’m not religious and never have been, but I do think that Catholics, Mormons, and Scientologists are a bunch of cultists.
I don’t have time right now to continue this discussion, but I do appreciate you not getting into a complete flaming hate war. (some of your accusations are very broad, but no sense in going there).
I hope you have a great day.
Respectfully submitted,
TRT
Even those who, like me, believe that an embryo or fetus might qualify as a human being with substantial rights, must admit that the modern “pro-life” movement has come to hate pre-born individuals.
The pro-life movement obstructs alternatives to abortion, ranging from condoms to subsidized prenatal care, to adoption by non-Christian or LGBT couples.
The pro-life movement opposes regulation of air pollution, water pollution, and food safety to ensure that pre-born individuals and their parents have fair and reasonable access to good health.
The pro-life movement supports political candidates who refuse to support rape-prevention programs, who refuse to punish rape harshly and refuse to provide support to rape victims.
The pro-life movement supports billions of dollars in government subsidies to large companies that provide no parental leave and no child health insurance.
And the pro-life movement adheres to an anti-science, anti-evolution ideology which precludes factual gene-related education and medical research to prevent genetic abnormalities.
After birth, of course, the “pro-life” movement works obsessively to cut government programs that ensure maternal and infant health. The movement blindly supports catastrophic wars and deliberate public-private destruction of the environment for profit (mammon).
The Real Truth,
Your anecdote isn’t very convincing. In fact, it’ rather pro-choice because you had the option to keep the child. Furthermore your situation doesn’t speak for all people. If you want to play that game, what about the story about the 12-year-old Yemenese girl who died because her family refused to allow her to have an abortion? Are you saying that girls like her don’t deserve the rights to abort? You seem to think that people who chose abortion are irresponsible, but that’ far from the truth.
Yeah, I love the notion that because one couple was lucky, other women who died probably deserved it.
And no, most abortion isn’t done out of “convenience.”
What a misogynistic thing to say. As if women take the decision SO lightly that they just have abortions and go get manicures.
This is why pro-choicers and “pro-lifers” should not speak. It’s like talking to children.
The Real Truth feels so strongly about Scientologists, Mormons and Catholics that he calls them cults. He defends Evangelical Protestants. Then he bristles at the term “religious.” He also jumps into this Tebow debate, defending Focus on the Family. He goes so far as to say that Focus on the Family doesn’t lie (despite their track record). Non religious people usually don’t care enough to get involved in debates about cults, true religions and the relative merits of Focus on the Family.
I think The Real Truth is truth challenged.
“36.Pro-lifers lie when they say they’re concerned with life because they support only the kind of life that they can project their insecurities and biases onto. The braindead vegetable Terri Schiavo. Fetuses.”
World Vision. Harvest. Compassion. Samaritan’s Purse.
All such chariatable organizations domestically and worldwide to shelter, feed, clothe, etc. women, children, poor, etc., etc. So much for the idea that pro-lifers don’t care about life in general. No, sir, you are a liar.
“The pro-life movement supports political candidates who refuse to support rape-prevention programs, who refuse to punish rape harshly and refuse to provide support to rape victims.”
Another lie.
“34.Nah, Punisher, you’re just making s**t up.”
No, I am not. You made stuff up about them not caring about human life outside of fetuses and Terri Schiavo, so you can throw more lies out that they are about oppressing women’s sexuality.
Funny, since besides the many charities I pointed out, pro-lifers also OPPOSE abortions when those are FORCED on women in other countries.
So much for your claim about pro-lifers being about anti-women rather than pro-life.
But then honesty is not your trait.
And the troll returns.
Pro-choicers oppose forced abortions too, dingbat.
But pro-lifers are anti-woman. This is why they oppose contraception, this is why they contribute to the spread of AIDS in Africa by denying women access to quality healthcare which includes contraception, this is why Republicans voted against Franken’s amendment which allowed female employees of US contractors to seek redress for sexual assault in criminal court, this is why Phyllis Schlafly doesn’t believe that marital rape exists, this is why they oppose sexual education which empowers women, etc. I could go on forever, but you’re a troll and I’m not feeding you anymore.
Go back to your wussy baby Men’s Rights forum or wherever it is you came from.
Punisher, I worked in rape prevention for much of the 1990s. The local pro-life groups offered no help at all.
They argued that rape was a non-issue, yet they took time to obstruct local medical care for women immediately following a rape because they wanted nothing to interfere with conception.
Punisher, You’re either a liar or extremely deluded. “Pro-life” is entirely misogynist. They wish that the a woman is force to relinquish her bodily-autonomy. If abortion concerns you so much perhaps you should invest in planned parenthood and safe sex.
Real “truth” said “The majority of charities are run by people with convictions and most of these people happen to be “religious.”".
False, most charities are secular:
http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Charities
Real “truth” said “the Mormons are a cult. The Catholics are the largest cult in the world. So are so many other groups like the Scientologists, etc.”.
All religions are cults. The Mormon, Catholic, and Scientology religions deserve just as much respect as any other religion.
Real “truth” said “My wife was in a situation similar to the Tebow family.Her doctor told us to abort our son or else my wife AND my son would die.”.
That’s just way too convenient a story – I don’t believe you.
John said “Non religious people usually don’t care enough to get involved in debates about cults, true religions and the relative merits of Focus on the Family.”.
Exactly. Lots of religious people like to claim to be non-religious because they think it gives them more credibility, but if they were truly non-religious they’d call themselves atheists. They don’t do that because they’re lying about their relgiosity.
Punisher said “pro-lifers also OPPOSE abortions when those are FORCED on women in other countries.”.
Pro-”lifers” oppose all abortions, they want to FORCE women to go through with childbirth. As Evan said pro-choicers also oppose abortions when they’re forced on women so spare us your feigned superiority – pro-”lifers” are about FORCING women to behave as pro-”lifer’s” want whereas pro-choicers are about women having the right to control their own bodies.