Menu

Opinion

Why Can't Pro-Choice Groups Handle the Truth About the Tebow Ad?

Tebow_TimsugarbowlAP397.jpg

AP

It’s been just about two weeks since many in the press learned about Focus on the Family’s plan to air an ad during the Super Bowl featuring Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam. In the much discussed commercial Pam Tebow discusses a mother’s choice. The fear and loathing coming from the pro-choice community over this ad has been intense. It’s especially intense given that none of the people coming forward to decry it have actually seen it! As we count down to Sunday’s big game the pro-choice community is resorting to lies, distortions, and behavior bordering on insanity as it musters more and more desperate arguments to prevent CBS from airing the ad.

As an adopted son, adoptive father, and man who has lost two children through miscarriage I'm well beyond steamed by the dishonest and outlandish assumptions being made by NOW, the Center for Reproductive Rights, various feminist attorneys, a former presidential campaign director and others. The reaction by these groups to an ad they have not seen speaks volumes, but first let's deal with the facts.

In a letter to CBS the Center for Reproductive Rights begs the network to pull the ad based on the status of legalized abortion in the Philippines at the time of Pam Tebow's pregnancy. While carrying him, Tim's mother had been diagnosed with amoebic dysentery, and had been advised to terminate the life of her unborn son. The letter asserts that since abortion was outlawed in 1870 it is unlikely that a doctor would've advised her to terminate her pregnancy.

"Given this context, it raises questions about whether physicians in the Philippines would have urged a married pregnant woman to illegally terminate her pregnancy in 1987." 

What the letter conveniently overlooks is that according to the Guttmacher Institute, anything but a pro-life research group, the regularity of abortion in the Philippines is a well documented fact averaging some 20-25 pregnancies out of every 1000 near the time of Tebow's experience. And as recently as 2000, although abortion is still not legal, Guttmacher reported abortions numbering 473,400, with some 79,000 seeking post-abortion care in 1,658 hospitals. That 473,000 number equals roughly 27 out of every 1000 pregnancies.

Celebrity attorney and feminist advocate Gloria Allred  repeated the slander against the Tebows' situation, telling RadarOnline.com that doctors would not have offered her such advice:

". . . 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..."

Pam Tebow was being treated for amoebic dysentery while carrying Tim and serving as a missionary in the region. The disease is highly contagious, easily passed through food and water, and extremely common in remote, developing parts of the world. If a doctor was aware of Pam's situation, familiar with the disease's side effects and the impact it could have on her, it is not at all out of the question that such a recommendation could have been made.

But in the last several days, the presence of pro-choice advocates making these claims in the media have been unavoidable. It would almost be laughable if it didn't mar the character of an impeccable family in the process.

Pam Tebow's son has grown up to be one of the most sought after college football players in history. And for the past several summers has served others far less fortunate than him in a number of charitable causes and missions.

Susan Estrich, who ran Michael Dukakis’s failed presidential campaign also weighed in on the commercial controversy.

"The suggestion that abortion is in any way connected to the value or the potential talents of the baby-to-be is so offensive that it is hard to believe Focus on the Family doesn't see the distorted underside of their own advertisement."

Estrich rightly argues in the same column that not every child spared an abortion will grow up to win the Heisman trophy.

Yes, that's right, Susan, some may cure cancer, develop nuclear fusion, or even become president of the United States. Or some may grow up and create an entire new and productive industry, or simply raise a quiet, but God-fearing family all on their own.

Estrich's comments on the issue come from her own personal history. She's written about being raped as a young woman and has spoken out forcefully about abortion. Understandably, she is a strong advocate for women who have experienced both. I understand that and have a lot of sympathy for her position.

But what if Estrich, NOW, Allred, the Center for Reproductive Rights and others were asked to agree to change the current laws so that abortion was legal to save the life of the mother or in the case of rape or incest but otherwise outlawed, would they support such a change?

Most likely not.

Why do I say that? How do I know?

Because they won't even support the right of "one woman's choice," to tell a watching world what a blessing her own son has been to her life.

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "'Baldwin/McCullough Radio"  now heard on 207 stations and columnist based in New York. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com. His second book "The Kind Of MAN Every Man SHOULD Be" is in stores now. And host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays 7a-9am EST on Sirius 161.