2.07.2010

Tebow's Super Bowl ad - So What?

The Super Bowl is about a hour away from kick-off, and like millions of people I've been watching most of the excessive pre-game coverage. (Really, 5 hours?) There's been some good interviews and feature pieces (I'm particularly glad that the current status of New Orleans was featured, for in these post-Haiti earthquake days we seem to have forgotten the blight many of our own Americans are living in) and some that I could've done without (is the Super Bowl pre-game coverage really an appropriate time for a political interview with President Obama? I think not.).

But I have now seen the "controversial" Tim Tebow/Focus on the Family commercial at least 3 times. And, as a pro-choice person, I say, "So what?" The word abortion isn't mentioned. Based on what his mother says, she could be talking about a difficult pregnancy, maybe a lack of quality health care. It is an invitation to view a website and to appreciate those in your life.

Being pro-choice does not mean forcing everyone to have an abortion. Pro-choice means having a choice, pure and simple. During the third Presidential debate, this question came up and our now President, then Senator Obama, had a very eloquent response. He said, in paraphrase, that he believed the best person to decide whether or not to have an abortion was the mother, in consultation with her family, doctors, and religious leaders. Pro-choice means women have the access to education and the option to terminate a pregnancy should that be the right choice for them.

Ultimately a woman may decide to keep her unborn child. I may be a pro-choice Christian, but until I'm in that position I cannot honestly say what I would choose. Should I make a poor decision and get pregnant right now, I'd probably choose to terminate because I'm not in a relationship, I'm not employed full-time, and I don't have health insurance. I'm in no position to care for another human being, to be a single mom. If one or two of those situations was different, I might make a different decision. But I simply can't say right now.

What I do know is that if I cannot make this decision for myself at this moment, how could I possibly make it for someone else? Who am I to tell someone they cannot end an unwanted pregnancy because it goes against my moral beliefs? I applaud those who work to educate women about their options when they get pregnant, and just as abortion should be an option, one of those options is also to keep the child.

I suppose the real controversy is that we get all het up (yes, I said het up) whenever someone makes a statement that is different than what we believe. Pro-choicers are upset simply because an organization that is pro-life has purchased a Super Bowl ad. This is the same childish behavior that has stalemated Congress, the "I'm against it simply because you/your party supports it." Guess what, America. It's time to grow up and be responsible adults. Quit getting your feelings hurt, justify your beliefs, and have mature dialogues. And as Jesus said, "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone."

2 comments:

  1. I don't know about the pro-choice upset, but another take on the controversy around the ad was CBS's decision to change their stated policy about running advocacy ads. Several years ago that was the excuse given to the UCC when CBS refused to run an equally benign ad (as was the Focus on the Family ad) that the UCC was trying to air as part of their identity campaign and attempt to get out the message that the UCC church was a very open and accepting church for a wide variety and diversity of people. CBS refused to run the ad because it as an "advocacy" ad and in their mind was promoting a pro-gay agenda. Now, when a clearly right-leaning organization wants to run an ad which promotes their agenda, CBS has changed their policy. If this is due to the bad economy and was a dollar driven decision, that is pretty poor. If it reflects someone at CBS accepting an ad because it reflects their position, but not accepting another ad because it does not, then that raises the specter of censorship and an issue of who controls the "public" airwaves. Just thought I would share that additional perspective. Otherwise, I pretty much agreed with your post!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree - yes to more dialogue, more civility, more listening and really trying to understand WHY the other person feels and believes the way they do. Thanks for your post.

    ReplyDelete