Heartless Progressives Send Message to Tim Tebow: We Wish You Were Never Born
by Jim HoftThey wish he was never born.
Heartless progressive women’s groups don’t want Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow to speak. They don’t want him to tell his story. They wish he was never born.
The Women’s Media Center and over 30 other liberal and women’s advocacy groups sent a letter to CBS urging the channel not to air a Super Bowl ad about Tim Tebow’s birth. The Heisman Trophy winner and Focus on the Family will air an ad during the game on Tim’s story.
Tim Tebow was born on August 14, 1987 in the Philippines to Bob and Pam Tebow, who were serving as Christian missionaries at the time. While pregnant Pam suffered a life-threatening infection with a pathogenic amoeba. Because of the drugs used to rouse her from a coma and to treat her dysentery, the fetus experienced a severe placental abruption. Doctors expected a stillbirth and recommended an abortion to protect her life. Pam carried Timothy to term, and both survived- via Wikipedia.
Now Tim Tebow wants to tell his story. He wants to air an ad at the Super Bowl. Earlier this week he responded to the attacks by progressives:
It’s not surprising that the progressives don’t want Tim to tell his wonderful story. They want his story hidden from the public. It disturbs progressives. It threatens them. It may persuade a woman to keep her baby.
Of course, this is not so surprising considering their past. Progressives have a history in genocidal movements and have a history of hiding this fact.
Founding Bloggers reported:
When the Progressive movement in this country gained steam in the early twentieth century, they spawned the genocidal Eugenic movement which directly led to the Holocaust. That’s not an exaggeration either. American Progressives worked DIRECTLY with the Nazis in their quest for race purity.
Progressives own the Holocaust, a fact they conveniently ignore today. Funny how they make a big stink about everyone else owning up to their history, but when it comes to them, they are exempt from their own rules.
And, of course, abortion was seen as one way for progressives to get rid of the undesirables.
Progressives don’t want you to know Tim Tebow’s story and they don’t want you to know their history. That’s part of their game.
These heartless progressives owe Tim Tebow and his mother an apology.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
400 Comments
"How dare a woman actually excercise her right to choose!"
"how dare some organization spend their money on an advertisement!"
I'd bet some might say how dare they complain about the whole thing.
but that is freedom baby, people will do things you don't like. And you know what, I wouldn't have it any other way
So Tim Tebow doesn't have any first amendment rights? How tolerant of the illiberal Modern Liberals!
Some of these folks really do fit the definition of FemiNazi.
What are the pro abortion women so afraid of? If they just want equal time, how about if CBS air an ad that shows a sweet baby having its brains sucked out and limbs ripped off while being murdered in an abortion. Would that satisfy the blood lust of these pro abortionists?
[sarc]
Progressives are merely trying to defend a woman's "right to choose."
However, any message that attempts to say anything positive about "choosing" to give birth to a child is an obvious attempt to deny a woman's "right to choose."
Therefore, such messages must not be heard.
Is that clear?
[/sarc]
This is exactly what the Nazis did–silencing their critics! I want my America back!
Everyone needs to understand the recent philosophical roots:
Margaret Sanger's, "The Pivot Of Civilization" and Betty Freidan's The Feminine Mystique are the Mein Kampf of the abortion industry and the so-called "Pro Choice" movement.
So, a media company freely chooses which adverts to have on their own network, and suddenly, they wish the person making the advert had never been born.
good wingnuttery.
So these libs are criticizing an ad no one has seen, engaging in religionism (if you can have racism and sexism, then this surely qualifies as religionism) against an entire group of people, and are trying to deny freedoms to people they consider undesireable. Yet it's the Conservatives who are the bigots. Yeah.
Progressives LOVE humanity. It's just actualy people they hate.
oops… "actual"
Shameful progressives: http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/ruth_bad...
Tim Tebow is a walking talking breathing refutation of their lies.
Pro- choice ?
That's one of their biggest lies of all.
What's the difference between CBS being paid $2.8mm to air the ad versus Ben Nelson accepting $100mm and Mary Landrieu accepting $300mm? I don't see these groups up in arms over these blatant attempts at "buying" air time. These groups have the right under the First Ammendment to voice their displeasure but again, CBS is a coporation that is struggling and probably did a gut check and said our progressive values are a sinking ship and this $2.8mm Capitalist gift is keeping us afloat.
Air the ad CBS and maybe have the cojones to make a statement, expressing your First Ammendment rights of STFU!!
He has a right to tell his story (freedom of speech) however I am also very pro choice. I believe in ALL personal freedoms. But if his story makes some women decide to keep their baby that is great. I don't get how people think that if you are pro choice you are then for women getting abortions…. That just is not true. I am against it for my own life but that does not give me the right to tell others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!) look I don't smoke pot but still feel it should be legal… but when I say that you must think I am a pot head… It is just plain ignorance to think that way.
We all point out the faults of the MSM…and there are many!
In this case, The People should let CBS know that they are doing the right thing by not succumbing to Leftist/Progressive pressure and pulling the ad! I just heard awhile ago that they will not pull it.
Do they think they are really going to sway anyone to their point of view by spewing this filth? These far-left progressives remind me a lot of fascists in World War 2: so disgusting you wonder if they are even human.
One of the dirty little secrets of the Eugenics and Abortion movement dont let out, is that it kills black babies more then anything else. Margaret Sanger was clear about this (Yes Children, the Progressives were, and still are, a pretty racist bunch) Abortion kills more black Americans than the seven leading causes of death combined, according to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 2005. Abortion killed at least 203,991 blacks in the 36 states and two cities (New York City and the District of Columbia) that reported abortions by race in 2005, according to the CDC. During that same year, according to the CDC, a total of 198,385 blacks nationwide died from heart disease, cancer, strokes, accidents, diabetes, homicide, and chronic lower respiratory diseases combined. These were the seven leading causes of death for black Americans that year.
Great article.
it seems to me that you didn't need the "[/sarc]"
Jim your doing great work linking progressives with eugenics and the holocaust. Talk about an inconvenient truth. People need to know this stuff, they need to see the history of the movement from it's roots upward and understand the fundamental nature of the mentality that exists out there.
Please, never let up.
Thomas Jefferson wrote something once…I think it said that We the People have the God given right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I also kind of remember that our founding fathers amended our Constitution so that we are guaranteed the right to free speech. As long someones paying the bill, CBS shouldn't be able to cut them off. Oh now wait…I think the President said that the Constitution is a flawed document. I guess that means the Declaration of Independence wasn't correct either. Never mind.
Desperation can transpire in many forms on the Left. This is just another attempt by the Left to marginalize and categorize their perceived plight. They need enemies to keep their ranks swelled with dependable haters that will voice an opinion with out understanding it's context.
Shame has no role for these woman. I'm surprised they don't protest their own births, and all collectively jump off a cliff together…I guess we can hope though…?
These groups that got all wadded up over the announcement that Tebow was going to be in a Focus/Family commercial did so before they even knew the content of the message. I can't wait to see it. I bet it will be a completely tasteful and non-offensive commercial. These "women's groups" could give a flip about the 'push the envelope – sexual' commercials and such. It is completely insane how little it takes to offend people these days when truly offensive content is devoured as art.
That being said….
GO GATORS! GO TEBOW! 15 Forever!
Can’t wait to watch this guy’s future.
Because that's what Pro-choice means, it's means you are FOR aborting babies simply because the mother doesn't want to be burdened.
I'm against rape, but I'm not going others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!)
I'm against murder, but I'm not going others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!)
I'm against cheating on your spouse, but I'm not going others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!)
I'm against abandoning your children, but I'm not going others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!)
I'm against Muslims blowing up stuff, but I'm not going others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!)
I'm against __________, but I'm not going others how to live their life (that's true freedom!!!)
It's called having a moral compass, and if you see someone acting like a fool, you should have the chutzpa to say something about it. That's ok though, as long as it doesn't affect YOU.
Tebow never said that abortion should be banned. His story is about a woman who exercised her "Right to Choose", and chose life. God forbid a pregnant woman sees the ad and CHOOSES to have her baby, too.
I guess this just proves that the "reproductive rights" crowd cares less about "choice" than it does about insuring that as many abortions be performed as possible.
[...] Email this to a friend | Print | Share on Facebook | Tweet this | // [...]
This is just one of many proofs that life is full of wonderfull surprises. I've got 3 boys one of them is serverely autistic.
So where were these bitches when Michelle Bachmann was told to act like a lady?
I can't believe I never heard about that. Thank you for the link. That is beyond shameful!
Hey, where were you yesterday? The moonbats were out in force last night, fun was had by all !!
…..Hanzo
In my country, only pro-abortion Progressives get a voice? When in God's name did that happen?
Drats! And I missed out on the fun!?
A pro-choice advocate was on O'Reilly last night. She ACTUALLY claimed this commercial would hinder a woman's reproductive rights. The only "reproductive rights" progressives want women to have is killing their unborn children. According to the Eugenic-loving, money first, heartless, progressives… choosing to KEEP your baby is not a right.
depends on what his CHOICE is.
sorry
Good job at making no sense.
There's an "edit" link below comments yo post. Click it to correct mis-spellings and typos. I use it a lot myself!
Good arguments and examples. We face a steep incline in the battle against generations subjected to moral relativism or, if I may, the indiscriminateness of thought.
I agree and am somewhat surprised to the lack of support for your comment.
I can never understand the problem. If these Liberals are so much smarter than the rest of us, and with Birth Control available everywhere, why do they keep getting pregnant? I keep seeing these commercials for Birth Control where the girl (a grown woman wouldn't think this way, I think) says that remembering to take a pill every day is just too hard, but they insist that they are capable of being the CEO of multi-million dollar corporations.
Or is abortion to be directed to other women–poor women, maybe?
People think that certain actions, so long as the actions don't affect them directly, should be permitted. Like pot smoking. The problem is, eventually, the action affects society and THEREBY the individual. Like pot smoking.
Thank you, Tebow family, for sharing your story and for giving hope to those who feel their situation may be hopeless!
Why deny Tim Tebow his right to be heard? Progs are having big conniptions recently with these "freedom of speech" issues, aren't they? First a monumental SCOTUS ruling which goes in favor of the 1st Amendment and now this.
Very interesting, let true progressivism be known to all, including it's facist roots. Early progressives were enamored of Mussolini.Rexford Guy Tugwell, member of FDR's Brain Trust and leading Progressive, said of Italian Facism "It's the cleanest, neatest most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious".George Soule, editor of the New Republic and supporter of the New Deal said " We are trying out the economics of Facism".W.E.B.DuBois, liberal intellectual and guiding light of Progressives , stated that the formation of the Nazi dictatorship was "absolutely necessary in order to get the state in order".Columbia University was noted by leading progressives to be Facism's "veritable home in America" and a "schoolhouse for buddinh Facist ideologues".The list goes on and on. Progressives, know thyself
I agree, I'm a pro-choice conservative. Tebow's mother made the choice to have a kid, risks and all. No government should force someone to abort or to carry the pregnancy to term.
I've always been against big government intruding on individual rights, I see government restrictions on abortions as intrusion.
I think that you and me, myself and I both have some valid points. I'm a strong believer in Education not Legislation. When I hear some one say "There ought to be a Law!", I cringe. Legislation to ban abortion, although may help, I think that a more effective approach is to insure that pregnant woman be given all the facts, including video's or early, mid-term and late abortions. If you want to really win the abortion wars, co-opt the pro-choice motto "The right to Choose" with "The Right to Choose Wisely!" I we Pro-Life citizens really want to win this battle, don't bother with the Politicians, Do what Tebow and Focus on the family is doing. Show the FACTS!
Remember if the left is screaming, we're scoring!
Why is it that the pro-choice people slam anyone who chooses not to have an abortion or speaks out against it. Don't they have the right to choose life too? Isn't that "pro-choice"?
Busily crafting a letter to CBS griping about a woman having her baby.
The list does go on and on, well done Hanzo.
There's the proof again – tolerance, choice, and free speech for all unless you disagree with the libs. It just makes me shake my head and groan; will it ever change?!
But that goes for everything, eventually, and can be used as an excuse to deny all freedom. To be free we really do need to be free to make bad and destructive choices.
I do think that abortion is different in some fundamental ways than pot smoking.
There are a lot of ways that it is damaging that don't put it over that line… that viewing an untimely baby as "punishment" is a destructive attitude to nurture and promote, for one. That it's necessary to prefer your own comfort is another. That people who are not perfect are not valuable is a third.
But what makes abortion a different sort of "destructive" than the attitudes it nurtures is that, in the end, a life is taken. That's not smoking pot.
It sounds like Tebow's mother had a legitimate medical reason to abort and took considerable physical risk when she chose not to do so. Even if abortion were illegal she likely would have had that choice to make. She is an admirable lady.
Yet here you are, posting due to the fact someone chose to carry you to term.
God bless America.
Democrats — the party in love with death.
My opinion of Tim Tebow SKYROCKETED with this commercial announcement. This a very brave and important thing he's doing.
Anyone who irks libs is good in my book; Timmy should show a commercial about the eugenicist Margaret Sanger next.
Sadly the pro-abortion movement is about free, unfettered, uncontrolled, infinite access to abortion all the time as an expression of feminism. Although many of these feminists choose to have a baby, to show choosing to have a baby as a positive (that is the key word there) alternative (another key word) to abortion sends them into a tizzy. Having the baby is seen as the alternative to the man given right of abortion, instead of abortion being the alternative that should rarely if ever used.
Knowledge is power.
every abortion supporting moron is glad they werent abortions, idiot libs
What makes pro-choice into pro-abortion is the accompanying arguments and context. What does "I don't want my child punished with a baby" say? It says that babies are punishment, they are bad and destructive, and unwanted. This is a *pro-abortion* argument. It is not, in any way, neutral "choice." Any arguments about how terrible it is for a woman to end up with a child are pro-abortion arguments. Any argument that frames the issue as "anti-woman" is a pro-abortion argument.
Any argument claiming to be "pro-child" is a pro-abortion argument because it inherently and completely devalues the unwanted child.
This leaves very few arguments that are neutrally about choice. Even, for argument as I don't believe this, a fetus is not a life so that there is no other element than choice… there is only a little room for those who want to argue that they truly want women to have the ability to freely chose to raise their child, to work for that freedom of choice. At one time abortion was presented as a legal necessity for the extreme cases, that no one would decide to have an abortion if they had any other options at all, that we all wanted abortion to be legal, safe, and above all, rare. It's not rare. Not even a little bit rare. Not remotely reserved for extreme cases and impossible situations that would drive a woman to a back alley or coat-hanger (particularly in a time of available and effective birth control.) Abortion is not rare, and the "women's" groups referenced above do not want people to see an ad that might suggest that the trouble they face is not insurmountable, that a child might be worth making the choice to keep it.
Ah, the progressive women's groups, who love to go on and on about the freedom to choose. Suddenly they want to silence the voice of a woman who excersized that freedom and made the choice to have her child. Why? Because you can't talk about choosing life because then it proves that the other choice is death. It removes all of the hypothetical, feel-good messaging about "reproductive rights" and puts a name and face on an actual young man who, if it had been thier "choice", would not be alive today.
Seriously celebrities, keep your opinions to yourself. I don't care what side you are on. I just want to watch you shoot em up in an action movie, or rock out on stage at a concert, or kick a foot ball on the field. I realy don't want to see you on TV telling me how I should live my life.
If you want to be in politics, then feel free to run for office. Otherwise…shut the hell up!
Let the ad be aired.
Quite right. If any killing happens, it should be when the kid is old enough to fight back. Just to make it fair.
Yep, over 550 comments on the article about James O'Keefe that Andrew Beitbart wrote.
……….Hanzo
wow, you call this journalism? First of all, your headline says that "progressives" said they wish Tebow was never born. That's an outright lie. Then you use some obscure blogger (some guy sitting in his pajamas in his apartment) as evidence the the "progressive movement" is responsible for eugenics. This stuff is so ludicrous that it's downright hilarious. "Progressives own the Holocaust." How frickin stupid do you have to be to believe that?
Why don't Tim Tebow and the moral crusaders leave people alone? You folks complain about big government but you want to shove issues of your choice down everyone's throat.
wow, you call this journalism? First of all, your headline says that "progressives" said they wish Tebow was never born. That's an outright lie. Then you use some obscure blogger (some guy sitting in his pajamas in his apartment) as evidence the the "progressive movement" is responsible for eugenics. This stuff is so ludicrous that it's downright hilarious. "Progressives own the Holocaust." How frickin stupid do you have to be to believe that?
Why don't Tim Tebow and the moral crusaders leave people alone? You folks complain about big government but you want to shove issues of your choice down everyone's throat.
I like it Chisten! Excellent points.
My one big concern about this is the precedent it sets. This time it's a pro-life ad. Next year it will be a pro-choice ad, then a pro-traditional marriage ad followed by a pro-gay marriage ad, etc. Then you are going to have ads by every political group out there who can pay for it (and many of them have deep pockets). One of these days I'll be telling my kids about how the SuperBowl used to show funny ads with talking frogs and people yelling "whaz uuuuuppp!" instead of everything being so political.
If this is where we are moving, fine. After all, it is a free country and these are private television companies. But just be ready for the SuperBowl to turn into an awkward Thanksgiving dinner when that crazy relative goes off over some ad he/she doesn't like.
Please make sure to reread the article and make sure you understand that it's not the media outlet that we are talking about but the progressive pro-choicers that wrote the media outlet a letter that we are discussing.
Should someone have a right to "choose" to extinguish someone else's life? The unborn human in the womb is a separate entity from the mother. It has it's own heartbeat, half the time it is a differenty sex than the mother. It has "life" because it is growing and developing. Dead things don't grow.
If a woman wants to exersize control over "her own body" to escape the responsibilities of parenthood incurred by her irresponsible breeding habits, she should give birth to her baby and then kill herself (her "own" body). That should satisfy her "right to choose" proclivity.
Thank you to Tim Tebow, his mother and father, CBS (never thought I'd be thanking CBS), Focus on the Family, and the contributors to Focus to make this happen. Thanks be to God, who allowed this child to be born despite the overwhelmingly poor prognosis. Oh yes, and thanks to all the liberals complaining about this upcoming commercial b/c it's now receive a phenomenal amount of press, and many more people will be watching it b/c of them.
The Party of Death ! That's what the new mantra has to be for the public. Liberals/Progressives are modern day Joseff Mengeles, Hitler's Doctor of Death. Heartless ideologues that need to be aborted from society. And Obama is their leader. Wake up, folks ! We are about to lose the goodness of HUMANITY !
If a person Chooses to support abortion then OUR W-2s and tax forms should contain a box to check if you wish that your own tax dollars are used to provide this service. If not then no monies from americans who do not support abortion be taken. Lets see how the left would respond to that.
What a bunch of nonsense. Choice is about an individual's right to control their reproductive process. It has nothing to do with the violent crimes you describe. There is nothing moral about your compass my friend. This is all about political control and that is why you must be defeated.
Men shouldn't even get a vote on this issue. Like my wife says, if men had to have the babies abortion would be a sacrament.
Or drinking beer…. let's criminalize all adult behavior and maybe we will all get into heaven.
Tebow is a class act.
Liberals should be retroactively aborted. It truly is a shame liberal mothers didn't flush their piece of feces progeny down the toilet.
My next business venture may be a clinic that performs retroactive abortions on liberals. My service will be free of charge; the satisfaction of getting rid of leftwing refuse is enough.
If you don't approve of abortions then don't have one… it's your choice.
I think Men At Work said it best in their song, Dr. Heckle And Mr. Jive:
He loves the world except for all the people…
You can't argue with Men At Work, after all they taught us about Vegemite.
Yeah, saw that. She had the same, silly, condescending smirk on her face that you see progressives display constantly. Makes me want to spit up.
Progressives have always been part of the liberal agenda that have had the "fetish" of death a main part of their polictical platform. They like other libs, anachorists, communists and haters of life and freedom are always threatened by people of conviction and faith. I hope CBS does not buckle.
No matter what progressives and the law says this is not a settled issue from ethical standpoint and deep inside everyone knows it. That is why they are so afraid. Remeber we have potentially 3 parties to this issue that frequently have wishes and rights in direct conflict with each other: the prospective mother, father and the baby. And the rights are not equal since the woman's right is superior to the two others in the picture. And the hallmark of special treatment is that it frequently exist at the expense of others.
The Eugenics argument is kind of creepy. No one takes you seriously today. And to suggest that choice is a plot to kill black children ignores the central tenet of pro choice which is choice. And the choice can only be made by the mother regardless of her race. The ugly truth is this is really about poverty. Those of us who have the means will get on an airplane and go get an abortion if our women choose it. But poor women don't have that option, so the state laws that restrict abortion only affect them.
We don't care to "sway" you. We intend to defeat you.
Don't take anyone's word for it. I urge you to do some research on the reproductive rights movement in this country. I did and it completely opened my eyes. It wasn't started to give a women a choice, it sprang from the idea of eugenics and was heralded as a way to rid the country of undesirables, namely black children. As I said, don't take my or anybody's word for it. And as to your remark about moral crusaders leaving people alone, well, people on the left, right and middle have free speech and right to exercise it.
Yeah, like trying to get Universal Healthcare shoved down our throats? Where is my right to choose in that mess?????
You are confusing the right to free speech to a nonexistent right to be heard. Tibow has no Constitutional right to the airwaves. And as soon as he steps into the political arena he is fair game to be criticized for his opinions. Welcome to the bigs mr. tebow.
This is the big lie of "prolife". Women can jump off cliffs and you are fine with that. Let's call you what you really are: anti-abortion.
Yes yes!! Because drinking a beer is exactly the same as stabbing a baby in the brain with a pair of scissors.
I'm sure the NFL is going to love getting a player that makes half the people in the country angry with his political opinions before he even takes the field.
Same thing with Universal Health care. Check a box , "OK bill me". Or "No thanks, I'll buy my own…or not". Or check a box marked "Liberal" and have taxes taken out to pay for Universal Healthcare, or "Conservative", no tax taken out for health care. Liberals/Progressives want UHC? Fine, they can pay for it themselves. Now that's PRO CHOICE.
The message has nothing to do with life.. it's anti choice.
I'm not a big sports fan, but since my husband is, I do have a passing knowledge of what's going on in that world. He saves/sends me articles that he thinks I might enjoy. One in particular was about Tim Tebow. I know the guy is young and will make mistakes (and, boy, will he be pounced on now for those mistakes after appearing in this ad) , but I admire him for wanting to tell his story. And I guarantee you it will not be in a judgmental, finger-pointing way.
Wrong. You people sound like Satanists with abortion already a sacrament. "Choice" implies death no matter how you slice it. You do not abort a baby, you abort a pregnancy by killing a baby.
The Pro-Abotionist (aka Choice) should have equal time and talk about how many abortions they have supported this year. Why not do like Harry Reid did with how many people are dying do to healthcare, give the number per minute of babies dying due to abortion. Now that would be a number the Pro-Abortionist should be proud of.
You are intentionally mischaracterizing the debate. Only right wing talking points try and frame the argument that way. For the rest of us it is choice… the woman's choice.
I am so sick of these radical progressives slamming any one that has a difference of opinion than them. Who the he77 are they to tell some one they can't exercise their freedom of speech right. I'm proud of Tebow for standing up for what he believes is right!! Too bad more professional atheletes don't follow suit. Kudos Tebow and don't worry… WE ARE BEHIND YOU 100%!!!
No, it won't. As long as you continue to advocate for laws that restrict the right to privacy and choice we will be right here. This is never over.
So you agree with everything else I stated in my post, except that you are able to conclude that I am anti-abortion, because I think that the women that are protesting this commercial should put up or shut up, and do the honorable thing by proving their point via example, by killing themselves due to their lack of worthiness and importance…? Maybe a lot of these woman are just angry because they are failed abortions themselves, and they're just angered by this one persons success in relation to their own miserable existences? Perhaps you just don't have anything else better to say other than to proclaim what I think…? Honestly mika…Why? Why must you blather on in such a manner. Are you incapable of structuring a few sentences together in order to purvey some simple thoughts? Perhaps you need to just take a little more time the next time you post, and really think about what you're saying…Everyone would appreciate it…!
That's the beauty of choice. It is up to the woman to decide and not right wing bloggers.
This is not about life or even abortion. It is about the right wing in this country attempting to control women's reproductive freedom by force of law. And that just won't stand.
I don't care to see it.
I had a very first difficult pregnancy. I very nearly died and was hospitalized twice. I chose life for my unborn son instead of abortion and today he is a handsome young student studying computer engineering at Cal Poly with a 4.00 GPA.
The ad that we are talking about says nothing about infringing on the "right to choose". It simply states that Tim's mother chose NOT to have an abortion. And it celebrates the result. The results may have been different but they were not. If the results were different do you think she would be so willing to share her story? I think not. I suspect I would not want to hear it either.
Who is bring up the subject of "Political Control"? You are! Who is trying to control whom? I thought is was all about "Freedom of Choice"
I agree that you should have the right to choose. Choose away! But don't try to equate pregnancy with tooth decay! Which is what the NOW gang would have you believe. That there is really no difference between an abortion and getting your teeth pulled.
I love it when women say you can't tell me what to do with my body. What about prostitution? There are laws against that. where do you stand?
To a certain extent I would agree with you that men should not get a vote on the issue. Except of course if & when men would want to lobby on their (or the child's!) behalf if they were in some small way involved in the "issue". By that I mean lobby with the other party involved.
Not the same thing. Universal health care is a social safety net. Choice is an individual right of reproductive freedom.
So you're not really pro life here are you… you're more pro fetus.
Being a former Libertarian, I understand your point-of-view. However, laws are there to protect citizens from the poor choices of other, not so ethical citizens. If your point-of-view were realistic, that would be awesome because we could tell the govt to go away, they are not necessary. We need laws to protect little innocent children because some irresponsible, unethical or confused individuals would rather destroy life rather than face the consequences of creating it. How sad it is that we need laws to protect babies. But, it is a reality. In the real world libertarianism does not work because people do not live up to the responsibilities associated with it. By not taking a stance when given the opportunity, you are in a sense saying that you are ok with what others do even if it is wrong. The horrible decisions others make ultimately do affect each of us. It is a shame that you do not care about others enough to stand for high morals.
This isn't going to change any minds. At the end of the day the pro choice people are still pro choice and the anti abortion folks are still anti abortion.
Let's have a block for the Iraq occupation… I'd like that money back.
Excellent argument. I wish more people understood this.
What is false about the "Choice" to abort is claiming that it's all YOUR freedom and YOUR rights. A true Libertarian view should be that the rights of the not yet born individual also matter. Talking about "Choice" for the mother but none for the offspring smacks of juvenile selfishness.
The better "Choice" would be to practice birth control "religiously" and choose to prevent pregnancy in the first place if you have to go around humping every five minutes.
I meant to say whose argment I was referring to. Spliff_Menendez, nice argument.
Another "pro lifer" showing his true colors. You aren't concerned with life, just the fetus. If you don't like abortions then don't get one. And keep your laws off of the rest of us.
People of faith don't threaten me. They amuse me.
They are afraid of people having options. It doesn't fit the eugenicists' agenda.
You are totally correct. Well Said!!!
Sorry, but it is the women who have to carry a pregnancy to term… not the father or the fetus. Most fetuses never make it to term as it is and you don't protest god for killing babies. The choice belongs to the woman.
You might want to catch up on your history reading about the whole progressive movement and eugenics. You haven't been told the whole story.
I am a sports fan and I have no use for any of their political opinions. If they want to make a public spectacle out of their politics then they risk turning off half of their fans. All I can do is hope my favorite team doesn't want to draft the guy.
Yes, there should be a line drawn at where laws need to stop. It would be nice if everyone could make good moral choice and we wouldn't need any laws. However, the sad truth is that people make bad choices. Yes, we should have freedom to choose if we want to make moral choice or not. However, as a society, we need to stand up and say that some things just should not be. Abortion is one of those things. And, that is why we have laws. People forget that we collectively give up freedom for government to exist. And, the reason why we do that is to protect us from the bad decisions others make. Murder is one of those bad choices. Unfortunately, government is more and more getting out of the protect the people business and more and more into the helping themselves out business.
If abortions offend then don't have one… your choice.
~smile~
I can't wait to see what his choice is. Any team.. any position. I think he is just great.
Freedom of speech is a two way street. You step into the political arena and you are fair game. Being young and physically gifted gives you no special treatment here. If he wants to publicly alienate half his fan base then fine. But don't whine about the criticism later. You have the freedom to speak without government interference. You have no such protection against other who think you are a dumba$$.
Intrusion for the mother inconvenienced by an untimely child as a result of her own irresponsible behavior… but what about protecting an innocent child? I'm against big government. But, I'm also against the unnecessary destruction of life for selfish purposes.
Too bad the child being aborted doesn't have a say, right?
I don't see what the problem is here. Why do these groups have such opposition to an ad airing that is their opposite view? Do they feel only their view is worthy of being heard? That's idiotic and absurd. While I personally feel that abortion would be better suited for cases of incest and rape, I don't object to the fact that other groups who think abortion is fine in any case get their viewpoint heard in a commercial or read in a magazine ad.
You all are so silly to think there are people who are pushing for abortions as if they were a good thing. No one wants abortions. Even an evil Progressive woman who chooses an abortion does so under duress and with the realization that the procedure is extremely undesirable, but perhaps the least worst decision.
No one wishes Tebow had not been born. That's quite a leap from some women who used their own right to speak to voice their opinion about an advertisement. If we discuss these issues like rational human beings, we might get somewhere.
I don't think you neccessarily understood my point. And I don't recall bringing up god in my little piece of thought. It is unclear to me where your assumption that most fetuses never make it to term come from but here are the facts: early in pregnancy a woman has about 20% chance of miscarriage. After the heartbeat is first noted (which is usually around 10 weeks) the odds of miscarriage fall dramatically to about 2%.
No, it's the same thing as smoking pot. Read all the posts before responding.
You don't care to see it – so it shouldn't air, then?
I disagree. Your emotional opinion does not define choice. If you don't approve of abortion then don't have one. That is choice.
I certainly do not see any harm in allowing the spot to run, I think the Christian group that is airing the spot, and spending 3.2 million dollars, could do something far more constructive with the money, like food banks, homeless shelters or Haiti, just to name a few.
I personally have never met anyone, left, right or center who is for abortion, only people who are for allowing others to decide for themselves, nobody wants, or plans ahead for an abortion!
A couple things to think about:
1. Will Tim T. be allowed in the NFL as being too "divisive" (Rush Limbaugh), as per our NFL commissioner friend?
2. I say if these liberals want to practice self extermination, thats less of them for my conservative(pro life) children to argue with years from now!
I will do all I can to change their mind, but remember, God will judge us all in the end!
I agree with nothing in your rambling posts. I merely picked out something outrageous and responded. It's what we do on blogs.
I think it is you who are angry because you don't get to control women's reproductive rights. And I hope it stays that way.
My post was a response to another opinion. I don't care about Tim Tebow or his commercial… I didn't even read the silly story.
It is all about freedom of choice. A freedom we currently enjoy that you want to see repealed. If you don't like abortion then don't have one… it's your choice.
It's what drive-by trolltards like you do on blogs.
Some people actually have something worthwhile to add to the conversation.
Life is just not always fair, is it runnerboy?
Abortion is no different then slavery years ago. Many could not grasp with their little minds that slavery was wrong and destroyed the dignity of "God-created" humans. God stated that He formed man in the womb and knew about each and every human being He created. We in our sinful state felt that we could destroy what God created and foolishly make our own selfish decisions. God allows us to make these decisions, but the consequences are devastating.
tell it to the dead baby
He's worse than Michael Vick.
When the bad and destructive choice adversely affects a child, or ruins hundreds of people's pension funds, or leads to consumers becoming ill, what then?
Yes, abortion is different from pot smoking, but people like to make the argument "it's MY body!" for both and more. Both arguments are fallacious.
You're missing the point man…I don't have any desire to control women in any manner. And the fact they are able to reproduce does not inherently make it a right. A women chooses to get inseminated (unless it's rape obviously), that IS her right. But it's not her right to abandon a life. Perhaps my moral understanding of it escapes you. And you just feel it's alright to allow murder as a prescription for poor moral judgment. I got it…
Too bad MY tax dollars would be used to subsidize abortion, no matter my religious convictions against it!
How's that "supermajority" thing goin", Mik?
ROTFLMAO!
It's their body, they can do what they want with it! (As long as they're not pregnant!)
There are no reproductive "rights".
Politically speaking, yes; I imagine hardly anyone will change their minds based on this ad. But women who are pro-choice might still be inspired to consider a different choice when faced with an unexpected or non-ideal pregnancy. And the story might give some hope to pro-life women whose doctors tell them that keeping the baby isn't really even an option.
It is a privacy issue, and the supreme court would disagree with you.
NO, it's pro-life.
Let them air anything they want. I just don't want it cluttering up Superbowl Sunday.
I agree — the accusation that progressives with Tebow had not been born seems to come from out of nowhere…
So mr. "guest" is accusing me of being a drive-by and a troll. Well both of those have commonly accepted definitions and neither applies to me. I have logged almost 2000 comments on this blog and don't intend to go anywhere.
A troll is a disruptive influence. I disrupt nothing accept right wing ideas, and that is the whole point of a blog.
You like to say "anti-choice" and everyone knows it's a misnomer. The gov't also tells people all the time what they can or can't do "with their bodies". You have to wear a seatbelt, or a helmet. You can't sell your children. You can't drink if you're under 21. You can't rape or murder others. Somehow, abortion on demand is your sacred "right", though.
Soldiers killing soldiers in war=BAD! MURDER!
Killing babies in the womb=MY RIGHT TO CHOOSE!!!!!
No wonder the Progressives helped out the Nazis.
Life isn't fair sometimes lib… tell em that.
Nobody's worse than Michael Vick.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!! RT is "mischaracterizing" it!!! LOL!!! It's a "right-wing talking point"!!
Right Turn is right in what he says, and mikatollah is an ideologue who thinks everyone else is wrong because they don't agree with him. Loser!
Hey! Pro-choice-ers! I STILL need someone to explain to me the "pro-choice" stance . . . Doesn't choosing to mess around in the first place qualify as a choice? Unless I hear otherwise, it sounds more like an "anti-accountability" stance (excepting cases of rape, of course).
Yes, you're right. They are making a choice, The Left will not allow this reasoning to stand, though, because women who speak out against abortion are making "the WRONG choice". See, only choices that the Left approves of are "right choices"; everything else is a "right-wing talking point".
Yeah, you don't get to decide who is "mischaracterizing" the debate, loser.
I completely understand your stance. I generally subscribe to the "shut up & sing" philosophy. But perhaps your a little harsh? Come one, just a tad? I mean, come on, the NFL is full of miscreants. I mean, they let Michael Vick back in. And what about that guy who was drunk and killed some guy. Is Tim Tebow really that bad in your opinion for basically making a "choose life" ad?
EXTREMELY well said. Focus On The Family won this battle because they offered an affirmative, inspirational message aimed at changing or reinforcing cultural attitudes toward carrying challenging pregnancies to term. Nothing in their message asserted that abortion should be made illegal, and as such the pro-abortion mob has no leg to stand on in protesting the ad.
http://thehayride.com/2010/01/on-the-response-to-...
What if the woman decides to speak out against abortion? What if she had one and it caused her to have debilitating depression or health problems? What if she didn't want other women and girls to suffer the same? Shouldn't her views be respected and heard?
Should 12 yr old girls be allowed to abort w/o their parents' knowledge? How about 10 yr olds?
I've missed nothing. Not only do you want to control reproductive rights, you would like to dictate women's sex lives. We can all pretend that all you have to do to keep from getting pregnant is not have sex. But human beings have sex and that is not going to change just because it offends some right wing blogger. And any public policy that ignores that fact and the privacy of citizens to do what they want with their own bodies is doomed to fail.
For example, your strategy of making abortions illegal has not significantly blunted the demand for abortion. It might be time for a new strategy that focuses on the demand. Because even if Roe v. Wade was struck down tomorrow women would find a way to travel and get the abortions they need. The only ones affected would be poor women.
So how do you come down on the Tebow ad itself?
That may be your opinion, but Roe v. Wade is the law of the land. Our job is to see that it stays that way.
I'm a woman and I choose NOT TO WANT "Universal Health Care". It's my body! Keep your laws off my body!
I completely agree that freedom of speech is a two-way street. And, yes, Tebow may be alienating some of his fan base (probably less than you think though). But if he catches heck for it, so be it. He's a big boy & I'm sure that he and his family have discussed this fact. The Dixie Chicks offended a great deal of their fan base and have never gotten back to where they were before, but I seriously doubt they would do anything differently. Some people put themselves out there, either by accident or by choice, but if they are grownups, I think they can take it.
Tim Tebow is a winner! I'm proud of him and his Mom!
Should someone have a right to "choose" to extinguish someone else's life?
Progressives SLAVER at the prospect of deciding, without trial, argument or reason, whom to kill off and whom to let live. They never change.
That was actually well said, and makes a lot of sense. We get so embroiled in the debate we forget that choice works both ways and there may be ways to limit the demand for abortion without the force of law.
As always, the first blogger to reference Stalin, Nazis or Hitler loses.
You lose.
Perhaps the title is a bit much. But the jist of the article is that these groups don't want his ad to run. And I don't anyone thinks a woman who chooses to have an aboriton is evil. That's quite a leap, too.
Yet when Right Turn said "Why is it that the pro-choice people slam anyone who chooses not to have an abortion or speaks out against it. Don't they have the right to choose life too? Isn't that "pro-choice"?" you called this "mischaracterization" of the debate and a "right wing talking point".
What, choice "works both ways" only when you decide it does?????
It is all about freedom of choice. A freedom we currently enjoy that you want to see repealed. If you don't like murder then don't murder anyone… it's your choice.
Actually that is what I'm doing right now. I'm framing the debate in terms of choice. I believe there is a right to privacy in the Constitution and as long as Roe is the law of the land it will remain safe and legal.
If you cared about life (and I don't believe that is what motivates you) you would work to make them rare. But that doesn't feel nearly as good as parading around with dead babies on signs. You are an ideologue and your motivation is your right wing political philosophy. If you care at all about "babies" it is just a happy accident.
You're not pro life you are pro fetus.
Brainless … are you sure you are not the product of an abortion gone wrong?
Classifying me, will in no way, make your opinion any more poignant…!
The less liberals there are, the less wars there will be. Nearly all wars are CAUSED by liberal weakness and appeasement, and have to be FOUGHT by conservatives. Less liberals means more lives saved and less suffereing overall.
Nice how you dodge the mention of a fundamental right to life.
I will never murder any "one". I don't plan on ever needing an abortion. If one of my girls gets pregnant we will find a way to make it work. But all girls don't have a guy like me in their corner.
The bottom line is regardless of what I may want for them, it's their choice.
To those attacking Tim TeBow, Focus on the Family and CBS,
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter". Isaiah 5:20 (NIV)
To Tim, his family and Focus on the Family –
"Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Romans 12:21 (NIV)
To CBS – thank you for airing this ad.
From Bound4Life –
Abortion Worldwide –Annually, 46 million babies die from abortion worldwide. That’s approximately one baby being aborted every two seconds.
Abortion in the United States — An estimated 48 million babies have been aborted since 1973. Approximately 24% of all U.S. pregnancies end in abortion.
From 1973 to 2004, nearly 30% of the black population were erased through abortion. Out of the average 4,400 babies dying daily that are reported abortions, an estimated 1,300 are African American. They account for 32% of women having abortions yearly, yet make up only 13% of the American population. African American women are 3 times as likely to have an abortion than other women. Is this why the Progressives, including the President, support a woman's choice?
And since it seems that getting the country to adopt laws banning abortion is kind of a stretch these days, maybe we pro-lifers would do well to spend more energy informing and helping women who are wrestling with the choice. Not to say that a law isn't called for, but in the meantime, the abortions are still happening. Volunteering at a crisis pregnancy center probably does more good than arguing with pro-choicers on a blog.
You disrupt nothing, accept right wing ideas? I had no idea we were slowly making a convert of you. I think you wanted "except." O_o
Why should the father have no say? Half the genes are his. What if it were reversed and the mother wanted the baby but the father forced her to abort? If "choice" is only for the woman then the father should have equal "choice" when it comes to whether or not he's going to make palimony payments.
mikatollah thinks killing is OK so long as it isn't soldiers doing it to other soldiers.
Bullsh**….social safety net your aunt's fat behind. Not my choice, so I don't want it. Keep your social safety net. You want it, fine, you pay for it. I'll keep my own money and my company health insurance [non-union], that I'm perfectly happy with. Oh yeah, "Socialist Security" while we're at it. Another, soon to be bankrupt, "social safety net". Why is it all of the "social safety nets' are on the brink of bankruptcy? Nanny state programs at their best.
Like Dred Scot?
"And, yes, Tebow may be alienating some of his fan base (probably less than you think though)"
How many rabid pro-abortion women know who Tebow even is or will be watching the game?
No he's not. If he is drafted by my favorite team he will be part of them until he retires and I will still support my team. When he opens his big mouth I'll cringe like I always do when one of them says something stupid and wish he would keep his big mouth shut.
But if he is not my guy, I'm not going out of my way to watch him perform. And that is the problem from a football marketing perspective.
So for you the right to "choice" hinges on the right to privacy? Does that mean I can murder my husband tonight so long as it takes place in the privacy of my own home? It is my privacy after all.
Agree with Buckwheat. Since every child borned is a blow to abortion, these feminists must despise their parents.
"No one wants abortions."
But you're WRONG.
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, wanted them very VERY much. She wanted them for "undesireables"; mostly blacks, but all minorities were happily given abortions too.
Jackass Pansy Asshat!
Nice to see you trolling by again. It's pretty amusing having a leftist that tells everyone how they should live, eat, talk, think, worship, how much they should make etc. etc. claim that a commercial rises to the level of coercion.
So either you are tied to your bed (don’t even want to know) and can't change the channel, or you are just stupid, eh lets go with the latter
The loving Liberials show there true selves again.
It'll be interesting if the government treatment panels come between someone and their doctor's recommended treatment because that treatment isn't considered cost efficient. Theoretically, someone could sue the government for violating the "right to privacy." It'll be interesting to see what's more important: right to privacy/patient confidentiality -or- the Federal government's control. And, if the Court were to rule that there is no right to privacy … how does that frame the abortion debate?
I hear you. Not every girl has a built-in support system to help her make things work if she gets pregnant. But there are people out there who want to help strangers make it work — through crisis pregnancy centers, churches, adoption, etc. We need more people getting involved in that kind of thing, but at the end of the day, you can't kill someone so that you can avoid a tough situation.
Do you really not see the error in your argument?
If I don't approve of slavery, don't own a slave? How about that one? It's my choice not to own a slave. Is that good enough?
Your argument is only valid if the fetus really is just a value-less clump of cells. And if it is or not is a fact entirely outside of my opinion or your opinion. We don't get to create reality by our belief here. We aren't Shirley McClaine taking her dead dog to the groomer for a bath and a stroll because she's unwilling to accept the physical reality that the dog isn't actually there and we're the groomer taking her money and pretending to shampoo a non-existent pooch.
It's more on the order of Schrodinger's box… one person believes it contains a cat and the other person believes it doesn't and never did contain a cat. The person who thinks the cat is not in the box and never has been can easily say, flip the switch or don't flip the switch, it's your choice… because no cat dies. Not ever. The person who thinks the cat is in the box *can not* offer the choice to kill the cat and pretend that a cat is not being killed. But in the end, the cat is either there or is not there. The *belief* that there is no cat is irrelevant to the truth. If there is a cat, you've still killed the cat.
I have always believed that the state has an interest in procreation and I thought Roe was a fairly good compromise, breaking it down by trimesters and limiting abortions after the first trimester. But that hasn't worked for a lot a people and they force us into an uncomfortable position of defending abortion to keep it from being criminalized.
A fetus isn't a life?
You have the choice not to spread your legs, not to use contraception, not to keep the kid, etc. etc. etc.
Typical leftist moron, you make the problem and someone else has to pay for it, in the case of abortion the unborn kid.
Too bad you and JPA cant rerprocude together, you could go on a legal killing spree and make your twisted demented lifes complete.
No; no one thinks a woman who aborts is "evil", but she may be misguided. With the REAL "pro-choice" voices being shut down by the Left, no one is really around to tell young women about the psychological, emotional or physical damage they may suffer after having an abortion, except for a few religious groups who more often than not, ineptly scare these women off. Many young women think that, if they do what their boyfriend wants, and abort, he will stay with her. This rarely happens. Some girls wind up sterile. Some are so depressed they need hospitalization or years of therapy. These things are rarely told to women thinking about having an abortion. The Left doesn't want these things talked about openly.
Wow I did not know that women in the US were being force to have abortions … LMAO, what an idiot
I would discuss the issue with a rationale human being, but the left seems to be all out of those these days.
I didn't even have to read the blog I've been hearing what they are saying, these people are a disgrace to the human race!!!!!!!!!! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK TIM!!!!! You don't have to answer to them, God is our judge. "Fear not what man can do to you, but fear what God can do to you" I paraphrased a little.
Joy Bahar you should be ashamed!!!!!!
That's like saying, if murder offends you don't do it… your choice. Huh?
Don't kid yourself. If your medical records have not been digitized onto an electronic database they soon will be. And privacy is always going to be an issue and we have to protect that right. And it doesn't matter if it is the government or an insurance company who violates it. It is wrong.
And I'm sure you would rather not pay social security or pay taxes either. That is why you are not in charge.
You aren't concerned with life, just the fetus.
Tell me stupid, what's a fetus?
…or any less.
I take it you've never seen the "I had an abortion" pride shirts. No?
And you know, "not the right time" is not "duress" unless you have an insanely mild notion of "duress." "Duress" is what Tebow's mother was under, facing a medically dangerous pregnancy. Palin's comment on this says "less than ideal" but she was understating it. According to the article Tebow's mother was told she could die.
That is duress.
And maybe that's why "women's groups" are protesting the ad. Someone might figure out what "duress" isn't.
Sorry you don't like my arguments, but they are what they are. So gowidgod.
Yes; somehow the Roe court managed to locate this "right of privacy" in the due process clause of the Constitution.
But there is no "right of reproduction".
I dodge nothing. I don't endlessly blog to try and solve an unsolvable issue. I think I've made my position perfectly clear.
If you click on through you'll find that Palin's remarks included that women should be told they are strong and empowered to take control of their reproduction.
It's not "empowering" to be told that you're so hopeless that abortion has to be there to clean up your mistakes.
Yeah, some pesky firefighters were denied promotions because they weren't brown enough for a certain "wise latina" too. She's been overturned many times, and bad judicial decisions often are, just like bad legislation! (McCain-Feingold!)
In a perfect world a father should have a say. But the world isn't perfect and every situation is different. As fathers we are little more that sperm donors until the fetus reaches viability. If the woman decides to carry a baby to term she then doesn't have an option to not consider us.
Oh you poor mistreated white people. Fate has been so unkind to you.
Reverse discrimination is the currency of racists. You are not going to get any sympathy from me.
Watch your mouth jt… no one cares about anything you say after you lose your cool.
Let me be clear. I advocate that no one murders their husband tonight… especially my wife. Get some counseling and try and work it out. If you still can't manage to work out your differences then maybe a trial separation. But I repeat, no murders please.
Sorry, I don't adhere to your idiotic rules, loser.
Say how's the Gitmo closure going? Are the terrorists going to cite the existence of Thompson, IL as the reason for their jihadi attacks now?
Way to avoid the argument, BTW, loser.
I'm pro-choice. But the choice is before having sex. That's when a woman should say yes or no.
Good luck. The "I wish you weren't born" argument won't win you any points with women or frankly any human who has any decency.
Perhaps you should try by force?
Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
-Benjamin Franklin.
And he IS "your" husband! And we all know that husbands have those annoying habits that they think is SOOOOOO funny…!
This person doesn't care anything about debate. If this were Usenet he'd already be killfiled. I wasted time on them a few days ago just for fun but you'll never get a cogent or logical response to any given set of facts. At least Syntax Game tries from time to time and is actually quite entertaining.
"If you cared about life (and I don't believe that is what motivates you) you would work to make them rare."
Yeah, that's getting harder to do with the messages Kevin Jennings is sending, along with MTV et al, and the ads which say "remembering to take a pill every day is SOoooo hard!" You guys like to parrot "safe, legal and rare", but in reality, the Left does NOTHING to make them more rare. You undermine all the Right's efforts to get teenage girls to respect themselves, wait until marriage to have sex as well as all efforts to make young men take their reponsibilities seriously too. Lefties celebrate Levi as a thorn in Sarah Palin's side; they do not look down on him as another dead-beat dad. They mock Sarah's child Trig, and laugh because she chose to have a "retarded baby". DO YOU GET IT? THEY MOCK HER CHOICE! And again, thimbs-up to Levi because he stuck it to Sarah. That he hurts Bristol and her baby Tripp is not even an issue.
Men shouldn't have a say in a baby that's half theirs? I would say that, if your wife really says that, she's a bitch to portray men as so lazy and unfeeling that they would all kill their offspring rather than give birth. I suspect she just thinks all men are like you.
They're brothers from another mother. Syn-G is truly a deranged freak of a barking moonbat, hard to take him.Mika tries to put a nice smiley face on Facism. Syn-G is fun to watch, you've definitely got a point there.
………………. Hanzo
GO GET 'EM TIM! Your Mom must be so proud of you. What a wonderful reminder everytime she sees you that SHE MADE THE RIGHT DECISION. When given the Choice always choose life.
For example, your strategy of making abortions illegal has not significantly blunted the demand for abortion."
After Roe V Wade, abortions skyrocketed.
Your arguments are full of BS. No one is "trying to make abortions illegal". Conservatives always allow for health of the mother. We would like to see these 3rd trimester operations stopped. And why is absinence not a suitable topic for sex ed in schools, but fisting and gay sex and oral sex is? It's very difficult to get kids to think that "sex can lead to STDs and pregnancy" rather than "oh, if I get pregnant I can just take a pill or get an abortion!"
It's not about white vs anything else.
It's about RIGHT Vs WRONG.
Ideologue.
Amen to that.
Excellent post, RT.You've got to remember the depth of lunacy the Progressives fall to. They engage in doublespeak on a daily basis, it's a way of life for them. So, when they say that they're "pro-choice" what they actually mean is the choice of no choice.You only get one "choice" to choose. And they set the parameters of your one choice."Liberlism is a mental disorder", it truly is. Characterised by narcissism and paranoia(conservatives want to take their "rights" away from them).They also tend to be very smug, condescending, irrational and in denial when presented with facts that don't jibe with their view.To them it's all about the party machine and the State becomes their Religion. This leads straight to Facism.
…………………….Hanzo
SG isn't trying hard enough. The person who parodied his handle is entertaining, though.
SG isn't trying hard enough. The person who parodied his handle is entertaining, though.
Progressives support a woman's right to choose — as long as she chooses abortion.
It is acceptable to speak out against life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness! But, try to defend them and you are in trouble!
SS is a Ponzi scheme and yes, it should be MY CHOICE to put money away how and where I see fit. I can make better decisions for myself and my family then the government can.
As far as taxes go, I am willing to pay, BUT NOT 43%!!!!!
And "(we're) not in charge" YET.
I agree with JT. I don't want my money in SS either. Where's my sacrosanct choice in THAT matter?!?!?
I love you Syntax_Gump!
Heh, with the same AV pic it kind of threw me when I came across their first post. Funny!
Me too. Have to look at the name. Syntax_Gump, not Syntax_game
I'm soooooooo tired of hearing the constant drone of Progressives on abortion on demand(infanticide). Instead of "reproductive rights", how about reproductive responsibility? …………………..Hanzo
Yes she does. She carried the baby, not the father. She nourished and protected it, not him. She endured the pain of birth and the potential harm to her health, including death! What did he do? Donated sperm? That's recreation for him! It took all of all of five minutes (if the guy was a liberal; maybe 30 minutes or more if he is a conservative). If it's HER choice to carry or abort, and her choice alone, it's also her choice alone whether or not to involve him in any way.
Just saw gump post in another thread. Funny but I hadn't noticed the broken acorn in the picture.
Do you know when a fetus reaches viability?
The earliest KNOWN age is 22 weeks.
"If we discuss these issues like rational human beings, we might get somewhere"> Like coming over to your side? Sorry…………………….Hanzo
Yeah, we see how much the govt cares about how it's screw-ups affect people. At least a private company has to act a little more responsibly or it's customers leave OR it fails (govt bailout notwithstanding!)
At least when an insurance co makes me dissatisfied with service, I can go to another company! Not so under the gov't plan!
Public opinion is turning against you everywhere. Look around. You're losing support. People know what you guys are about and they don't like you. Folks who never in their entire lives spoke up or protested ANYTHING have gone out with signs, made calls to congressmen and said "Enough!"
You're on the losing side. Where losers belong.
Abortion is a tricky issue, but at some point science will allow babies to survive outside the womb soon after conception. When that happens, folks who are pro-choice are going to have a lot to think about.
I'm a libertarian, which means I believe people should be able to live their lives however they want–so long as they don't harm another individual. That means drug use isn't any of my business, homosexuality isn't any of my business, infidelity isn't any of my business, over-eating isn't any of my business, etc.
I know those who are pro-choice will argue a fetus isn't an "individual," but the day is approaching when the scenario I mentioned in the first paragraph will be a reality. If these folks don't think a fetus is an individual now, will they change their minds or fight for their right to murder?
That feature is only available if you sign up for Intense Debate…
Let me go here again! Some of our politicians don't understand GODS WORD, If the healthcare bill includes taxpayer funds for abortion, we who pay taxes,are all guilty of murder!!! Abortion is murder!!! Leviticus, 17-11, "Life is in the blood" So, when the blood enters the entity is when life begins! As my pastor always says,"Christianity is not a religion, it's a reality"!!!!
My two children are adopted. In my eyes they are blessings as much as Tim Tebow is to his folks. My childrens birth mothers made the right choice even though they made a poor choice of getting pregnant before they were ready to accept responsibility for another human being. The only choice a guy should make is keeping his fly zipped up and hormones in check. The women needs to say no. If both are unable and do the deed, then the only choice is to make another choice and put the child up for adoption. Either that or take responsibility for your action. If you abort all you do is take away the evidence of your irresponsibility. You kill a child that has no rights and is relying on you for life.
A common criminal has more rights than the unborn. It seems like in America, the unborn gets a death sentence without any trial. Even if you do not believe in God, most biology books would describe what happens when people make the committment to have sex. Woe is me America, your sins are piling up.
You talk about freedom. So free sex and do what ya want. Keep your laws off my body blah blah blah.
Your heart is in a dark place and I hope you dream at night about the 50 million Americans that died because of your support of the heartless murder due to your reproductive freedom crap. I hope that you hear them crying at night in the dark of the night. Did your mother and father support abortion? Apparently not. You are alive yet want to deny life to the unborn because of your pathetic immorality. When you stand before your Creator, I hope that you can explain to Him what you have done with the time He gave you. You are the problem, not the solution. Oh ya, get use to the smell of sulpher and I hope you like hot weather.
Ohhhh…. I thought since he had a profile, he had access to the features.
I'm pro fetus, but anti prohibition on the basis of the fundamental flaws of prohibition as a policy. Ditch the semantics and admit it, a fetus is life.
So excercize your CHOICE to change the channel for a minute if it comes on.
Let me also say that although I believe that abortion is wrong, I really don't care if a woman decides to have an abortion, I just don't want to pay for it!!!! God will be their judge, not me!!
I thought the liberals wanted everyone "to get along" and wanted everyone to "cherish different points of view".
His story should be heard throughout the world.
What do you do?
You have posted nearly 2,000 comments in just 5 weeks,
Do you do this from work?
Do you have a life?
Do you post from prison?
I'm really curious?
Haven't lost my cool, just voicing my opinion. Oh, I forgot. Progressives hate that…sorry, didn't mean to ruffle your turkey feathers.
It's actually an ACORN 'kookie', believe it or not, these were served at the White House last year at a party. The story was right here on Big Government and that's when Syn-G changed his avatar to the ACORN pic………………..Hanzo
I've been saying the same thing. I was a 3 pound baby and my twin didn't survive because at the time I was born technology hadn't reached the point where many babies that were as premature as we were lived. Now, they're saving babies that are less than a pound at birth. I have a feeling that scientific advancement is going to end up defining this debate more than anything.
I wonder if he knows what he's in for over it.
[...] » Heartless Progressives Send Message to Tim Tebow: We Wish You … No Related Post View the Contact Powered by Blog [...]
My take is and always has been this, if the majority of American people are pro-choice then a 30 second pro-life ad wont change peoples views. Why be scared of a message about life. Isn't that what the pro-choice view about? Choose life or death. Pam Tebow choose life.
I support this not only because I am a Florida grad, not only because I am a Christian, but because he has a story that is worth something of value. That story is about life!!!!!!!
@mikatollah
A recent article notes that the under 30 crowd are the MOST pro-life demographic:
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/805...
Hence, in the long term, it 's moot if Roe v. Wade is still on the books decades from now. The abortion industry will collapse because the young people today and their children won't be interested in killing their babies.
This goes back to supply and demand.
HA! Thanks.
Right on!
These women are harbingers of whats to come. This is not about Tebow as much as but more about a proggresive agenda to control the news. These people are disgusting and pro-choice nazis. Abort, abort abort, .meanwhile the muslims are procreating 8 to 1 of our babies. This country is going to hell in a handbasket and we need to stop this insanity.
My grandmother was poor, but she didn't use that as a good reason to kill my mother or any of her other children. She as well as my grandfather viewed each of her babies as a valuable human beings of great potential.
Hence, poor Black women in this century abort their babies because of a warped worldview promoted by the abortion industry and self-serving Black (mis)leaders. Thus, like Black on Black crime, the high abortion rate in poor Black areas is an ethical not economic problem.
Dodge.
Ironically, the pro-abortion feminists, who want "privacy," support Obamacare which will lead to MORE government intrusion in women's private decisions.
The pro-abort crowd is trying to keep their dying industry afloat in an increasingly pro-life American culture. They could care less about the privacy of poor Black women.
What a philosophically sorry-assed bunch that demonstrates it's contemporaneity by how widespread infanticide is. Nothin' says "ballsy" like killing a prenate.
Actually, only 40% of Americans are "pro-choice" so the NFL is hardly enraging half its audience:
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/805...
Besides, thanks to the rants of pro-abortion activists like yourself, more Americans no matter their beliefs will check out the ad to see what all the fuss is about. It's a win all around.
This is a reminder that God indeed has a great sense of humor.
Thank you Tim. Follow your heart.
@nathan
Actually, 6 out of 10 Americans now call abortion "morally wrong":
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/805...
The hubbub from the hardcore pro-choice crowd indicates that they aren't REALLY for choice if the mother keeps her baby.
@mikatollah
The ad is pro-choice in the truest sense of the word.
Don't get mad at Tebow's mother for exercising her choice and giving birth to him. If you do get mad at her, you'd be truly anti-choice.
I am your problem and your worst nightmare. A pro choice lib that can't be intimidated. Sleep well tonight… I will.
In short, mikatollah is anti-choice if the mother chooses to keep her baby.
Can he just call himself pro-abortion and be honest with himself?
Whining about Margaret Sanger impresses no one. Live in the now… I do.
@mikatollah
The Libs learned that truth when Scott Brown won in Massachusetts.
The irony is that Brown would have lost if liberal women didn't abort so many of their babies, i.e., future liberal voters:
http://bigjournalism.com/sswift/2010/01/22/thirty...
We don't take a poll to decide who gets Constitutional rights. As long as privacy is the law of the land, public opinion is unimportant. Besides, public opinion ebbs and flows.
Considering American support from abortion is 40% and falling, you're not really scaring anyone.
Well, that's communist of you.
And to think I was called a "Taliban Fascist" today for taking a stand against abortion…Lol.
Hey, that already happens during my family's Thanksgiving dinner.
The reality is that every opinion is going to upset someone no matter how politely you express it. That's the way of things.
And I don't like my taxes going to pay for a war my government started on the people of Iraq. We don't always get what we want.
[...] » Heartless Progressives Send Message to Tim Tebow: We Wish You … No Related Post View the Contact Powered by Mobile [...]
43% federal taxes? Congratulations, you must be doing very well.
Or you are confused, which is what I actually believe.
Well then we agree… it is about right and wrong. And if it isn't about right and wrong it's not worth arguing about.
Watch your mouth… keep it civil.
Try and stay focused here. You have not heard me mock Sarah Palin's family choices. And who is Kevin Jennings? I have no idea what you are venting about.
The left is the only ones who try and educate teenage women how not to get pregnant. And we work at the clinics that dispense birth control… you should thank us for all of the abortions we have prevented.
If you want to discuss Gitmo you should probably pick another thread. Focus…
Not separate from its mother.
Wow… a lot of pent up anger here. Maybe you should go get a steam or take some deep cleansing breaths. We don't want you to make yourself sick.
Don't believe right wing talking points. They are written by the insurance industry to scare people into voting against reform. It's all lies.
You do realize that Scott Brown is pro choice… don't you?
I find it interesting that Women's Groups will object to a pro life ad but have NO objection to the Superbowl Go Daddy tits and p*ssy ads which sexualize women AREN'T offensive to them Effing hypocrites! These are the same women's groups who claim to be' pro choice'…. well you can't be pro choice if you don't let allow OTHER choices! KUDOS to CBS for allowing this ad to run and not caving in to a butch of bitching bitches. And major Kudos to Tim Tebow for sharing his story and having the courage to stand firm and remain dignified in the face of unending bigotry and hatred from alleged "progressive liberals".
I'll say it again… you can't be pro choice if you don't allow other choices.
Well, I went out to pollingreport.com and looked at the latest poll on the abortion question which was a Quinnipiac poll conducted Jan. 5-11, 2010. They polled 1767 people and asked the following:
"Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases or illegal in all cases?"
Always legal – 18%
Usually legal – 34%
Usually illegal – 24%
Always illegal – 18%
Unsure – 5%
So it looks like it is more like 52% of Americans that support keeping abortion legal, not 40%.
Sorry to disappoint, but I'm a capitalist.
Why does everybody call this "PRO-CHOICE"? This is the "PROGRESSIVE'S" term to downplay and undermine what is reality. When you are born, that is "LIFE". When you pass away, that is your "DEATH". Where in that "LIFE" time line do you put "CHOICE"? You are either "PRO-LIFE" or "PRO-DEATH"!!! Nothing less, Nothing more.
Wake up Planet Earth, let's make the "PROGRESSIVE" cowards call it what it is, "PRO-DEATH". You know they never will.
Crazy, isn't it? That's another favorite technique of the Progressives, accuse others of what you're guilty of. "Progressives"( be they Facists, Communists, Statists, Marxists, etc., they are all socialist in nature, different name, same face, it's all semantics) use doublespeak everyday. One shining example, as we've seen today, right here, is abortion. Instead of calling a baby, a baby, they try to 'de-huamnise' the unborn baby by calling it a fetus. They also hide behind the guise of 'choice' and 'reproductive rights', as I'm sure you well know.
…………………Hanzo
Come on mika. Teaching kids how to have sex dosen't prevent pregnancy, that's a myth, it only raises their interest. You don't know who K.Jennings is? Ok, he's BHO's 'safe school czar'. He introduced 'fisting kits' into public schools in Massachusetts, under the radar unknown to parents of the kids. Another shining example of 'Progressivism'. When are you going to wake up? ……………………..Hanzo
Mika, it's not about women do with their bodies, it's about what women do with the innocent baby in their body……………………Hanzo
Ok, focus mika. Abortion isn't about what women do with their bodies, it's about what women do to the innocent baby in their bodies………………………Hanzo
Another particularly specious argument for abortion on demand the "Progressives" forward is that it's all about tolerance, choice, rights. The only person involved in this equation who is being denied tolerance,choice and rights is the innocent unborn baby…………………….Hanzo
I'm a retired AF officer. If you want to be pen pals you can contact me through my family website: http://www.hotberry.com
I'm a retired AF officer. If you want to be pen pals you can contact me through my family website: http://www.hotberry.com
I think there are a lot of pro-choice people out there who are like you and who don't object to this ad. The groups raising a ruckus about it, though, are clearly pro-abortion and not truly pro-choice. If they were really pro-choice they wouldn't object to the ad because it showcases one woman and the choice she made. If they wanted to expand the discussion and showcase other choices, they could make their own ad showing a woman who chose abortion and went on to live a happy life. But that's not what they want to do – the only choice that matters to them is abortion.
I know myself. And I won't stand for anti choice partisans telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. If you don't approve of abortion then don't get one. It's your choice. I intend to see that it stays that way.
You are mistaken if you think that because we don't agree that I lack focus.
It's ok to disagree with me…
Not at all, mika. I was merely parroting what you said in the comment before mine. I don't think you lack focus, I just think you're wrong, on just about everything. Ok, everything.
……………………….Hanzo
I think the question people should be asking is- why is a Christian group spending 3.2 million dollars on a 30 second ad, when people are starving in the streets, what about Haiti? Just think of the good that could have come from a charitable organization having 3.2 million dollars to spend, think of the lives they could save, all the good they could do, this is crazy that nobody even considers this!
"So Tim Tebow doesn't have any first amendment rights?"
When are you fucking nitwits going to figure out that the first amendment has to do with THE GOVERNMENT restricting your right to free speech?
Good God you people are stupid.
Why do you insist on being so religiously intolerant? Earlier you asked another commenter to keep it civil because he made offensive statements about your wife. I agree with you on that.
Why do you make offensive, uncivil statements against my faith? It seems to be a common thing for you.
You will find a lot more respect on this board if you show the same respect and civility you expect of others.
This is actually a misquote from Franklin's "Poor Richard's Almanac" as he is talking about wine:
"We hear of the conversion of water into wine at the marriage in Cana as of a miracle. But this conversion is, through the goodness of God, made every day before our eyes. Behold the rain which descends from heaven upon our vineyards, and which incorporates itself with the grapes, to be changed into wine; a constant proof that God loves us, and loves to see us happy."
Cheers!
What force are they going to use? Obama's "civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded [as the military]" is no more than a forlorn quote in the trash bin of 2008 campaign rhetoric.
Really?
I think it is you who are angry because you fear that if it is left up to the individual states you won't get to control women's reproductive rights.
You're so opposed to the federal gov't enforcing a set of reproductive rights that differ with your worldview. Why is it you act so aghast that others should feel the same about you?
The other day Pandora Radio was advertising a $10 Off Coupon for the morning-after pill. I'm not making this up. Does anyone else find that ridiculous? What gives? What kind of message is that sending?
So you are FOR a medical right to privacy AND for a health care reform provision which wouild put everyone's medical records into a gov't database?
As you kill the baby just tell it "This is not about life or even abortion. It is about the right wing in this country attempting to control women's reproductive freedom by force of law. And that just won't stand. "
I don't see the logic of this statement. How exactly do you define anti-choice?
Is it taking away choice when a high school counsellor tells you she thinks you'd be a good fit for Florida State? No! You can still go to Florida if you prefer. Likewise, this commercial is encouraging women not to have abortions.
That being said, I am in favor of taking away that choice (the reproductive one, not the collegiate one!) for the same reason that I'm glad our government doesn't give us a choice on the subject of murdering humans who aren't in their mothers' wombs anymore.
I see…. so "controlling reproductive freedom" is NOT about taking care not to get pregnant in the first place? Huh.
Whoops… make that "wish" instead of "with"
Mikatollah,
I took the time to read all of your posts here; your argument is ill-informed and circular.
The "right to control their reproductive process" was created by the activist Roe vs Wade decision in 1973, which overturned the longstanding statutes in all 50 states. Its rationale was the same used in the 1857 Dredd Scott case which overturned the anti-slavery statutes extant at the time.
The Scott ruling said that the court could ignore the humanity of the slave because "good men could disagree" as to that humanity; but must recognize the property rights of the slaveowner.
The Roe ruling said that the court could ignore the claims to human rights of the unborn child because the existing laws differed in degree as to whether those rights should be enforced from the moment of conception, as laws drafted after 1870 maintained, or whether enforcement should begin at "quickening", which was the criterion from Common Law for centuries before.
You and your wife should read Susan B Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton on the issue. They rightfully recognized that abortion is a tool used by men to keep women in sexual bondage.
Jackass Pansy Asshat!
Nice to see you trolling by again. It's pretty amusing having a leftist that tells everyone how they should live, eat, talk, think, worship, how much they should make etc. etc. claim that a commercial rises to the level of coercion.
So either you are tied to your bed (don’t even want to know) and can't change the channel, or you are just stupid, eh lets go with the latter
It'll be interesting if the government treatment panels come between someone and their doctor's recommended treatment because that treatment isn't considered cost efficient. Theoretically, someone could sue the government for violating the "right to privacy." It'll be interesting to see what's more important: right to privacy/patient confidentiality -or- the Federal government's control. And, if the Court were to rule that there is no right to privacy … how does that frame the abortion debate?
Clarence Gamble, president of the American Eugenics Research Association, said, “There is a great danger that we will fail because the Negroes think it a plan for extermination. Hence lets appear to let the colored run it as we appear to let [the] south do the conference in Atlanta.” Under this policy, Planned Parenthood, which Margaret Sanger founded, of America hired a full-time “Negro Consultant” in 1944. Margaret Sanger said about her 1939 , “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Now if we take this together with fact that the "Great Society" programs actually chained generations of blacks to poverty, it makes alot of sense, following your logic that " The ugly truth is this is really about poverty", we can see the promotion of Abortion as a way to promote deaths of blacks. I am just using the Progressive/Socialist argument about killing innoce…..errr abortion. Oh and I am sorry that the facts disturb you.
Hah! Good one Syntax! Hope he doesn't mind the name calling. Progressives/Libs love that stuff…"Rules For Radicals" and all that.
"Jackass Pansy Asshat! "
Thanks, at least someone had the sand to just say it. Mik is exactly that. Jackass.
I don't really see the point, I don't go to huff/kos and troll people where I'm not welcome, it seems like a waste of time. Unless you actually are in fact middle aged and in your mothers basement.
No of course not! An army of ugly Code Pink members! The smell alone should provide victory.
Murder is a crime. I would never do that to anyone. I choose to be a law abiding citizen.
You do realize that Scott Brown is pro choice… don't you?
NO, if it is left up to individual states it will restrict access only to poor women. Most of us will just get in our car or an airplane and go to another state for the procedure.
Like everyone on this list, I oppose federal laws that I disagree with…
Whatever I said it was not to you and I am never uncivil. If my opinions offend you I can't help you other than to say don't read my posts. It could be that you are too sensitive to handle opinions that conflict with your own.
I'm not even sure what I said that offended you….
If these progressives believe the crap they spew why is it that they NEVER practice what they like to preach to us? Why don't they choose to end their own lives if they feel so strongly about it.
I mean even at 30, 40, 50 or 60 years old, wouldn't it still be late term abortion. Late, late term.
I guess the most we can hope for is that they believe the garbage they spew so completely that they NEVER BREED, EVER, and eventually they will be all gone.
Indeed!
Just because 3.2 million was spent on this ad doesn’t mean 3.2 million automatically was taken away from Haiti or other starving people.
Focus on the Family has contributed greatly to the Haiti relief effort. They are also working with other organizations to increase the collective effort. FOTF also funds numerous charities all over the U.S. I’m sure their contributions will exceed the amount the ad costs.
More importantly the funding for the ad came from donors who specifically gave for this project. NO MONEY from the Focus on the Family general fund was used.
So you are saying that you agree with a 30 second spot worth 3.2 million dollars be spent on an issue that most people has already made up their minds on? Do you think they are getting their monies worth? Do you believe that churches or religious organizations should be allowed to contribute to the political process, and still maintain their tax exemption? I am Catholic, I do not support abortion, but do not believe my view should have any impact on anyone else's decision on this subject.
So your only distinction is that murder is legally wrong and therefore you wouldn't commit it? Slavery was once legal. I guess people could have sat back and said at the time, "Slavery isn't a crime. I own several human beings as my personal propterty. I'm a law-abiding citizen." I also recall that the expression "rule of thumb" comes from an old law stating that a husband could beat his wife with a stick as long as the width of it wasn't wider than the width of his thumb. So, a man could have beaten his wife, but as long as it was a little stick he could have slept soundly that night knowing that he was a law-abiding citizen. Just because something, i.e. abortion, is legal doesn't mean that it is the just or moral thing to do. And to cut you off on your next argument, I am not saying I think women should be thrown in jail because they have an abortion. The article was about a woman choosing life – showing her choice and women's groups not wanting CBS to air that view.
Abortion isn't slavery. If abortion offends your morals then don't have one. As long as Roe is the law of the land it is your choice.
That was not going to be my next argument, but since you brought it up, why shouldn't a mother be thrown in prison for killing her baby if it is murder? If she kills her infant child she is sure going to suffer the consequences. So what's the difference, I mean if abortion is murder? Isn't she an accomplice to murder? Don't be a coward… if abortion is murder then say it.
go tebow and mrs.tebow stand firm what you believed ,God bless tim and his family and good luck with your future hope we will see you play again in NFL
As long as slavery was the law of the land it was okay, too. That is going back to the original argument. And I am no coward. I absolutely, positively call abortion murder. But I stand by my statement that I do not think a mother should be thrown in jail for having one. I think one mistake that pro-choice folks make is that pro-life people are full of hate for the moms. Having "held the hand" of a family member who has gone through an abortion, nothing could be further from the truth. I feel that in this day and age, that many expectant mothers have been sold on the idea of abortion as the ONLY answer. And humans being humans, many of these women suffer after the fact. My family member had an extremely difficult time conceiving a child after her abortion and was racked with tremendous guilt and shame. All I think the ad was saying, is that there is another choice – choose life. If women's groups are about "choice" then why are they threatened by someone telling women that there is another choice. As I stated, this article, to me anyway, was more about freedom of speech than abortion.
A baby by any other name is still a baby.
That's the truth mikatollah doesn't want to face.
So, I guess you's agree with slave owners that chained Black men only existed to produce more slaves.
That about sums it up.
What's even worse is that you NEVER see pro-abort feminists protest athletes who have babies by eight different women. Thus, the feminists show their more pro-infanticide than pro-woman.
Up until the 19th century, law-abiding White American citizens could own other human beings.
Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's ethical.
I see. Then you definitely oppose abortions carried out after the 20th week because at that point there is a chance that a baby birthed even that early can survive with medical treatment, or is it still not a human being even then?
Mikatollah, you and I have been in a discussion in over this article. I found some of your comments to be thought-provoking. However, now I see that you are just posting in multiple places with less thought-provoking comments. Overall, you appear to be what my husband's earthy grandmother referred to as a "s*!tstirrer." Kristine has obviously done a lot of reading on the history of eugenics and the abortion movement in this country. It is very important to understand history, as I told my students for years, and she was merely pointing out some interesting & telling points in history. For you to say she is whining… is extremely dismissive and doesn't take offer a counterpoint to her argument.
Focus on the Family is already helping Haitian quake survivors:
http://www.citizenlink.org/clspecialalert/A000011...
My question is: "Why doesn't Planned Parenthood use all their wealth to provide food, water and clothes to Haitian quake survivors?"
Focus of the Family is ALREADY sending money to help quake survivors:
http://www.citizenlink.org/clspecialalert/A000011...
As for the tax exempt question, one Baptist pastor I know HATES that law and wish it would be overturned. He feels tax exemption gives too many pastors an excuse to water down their sermons and avoid preaching again legally endorsed sins like abortion.
I see the pastor's point. In China, Christianity is spreading like crazy despite the government raiding churches and imprisoning pastors. By contrast, too many American pastors wimp out when threatened with a lawsuit.
I do, too…..but, you can't edit a comment if it has replies.
I don't think we should be performing abortions after the 12th week, and I don't think anyone undertakes a second trimester abortion lightly. But there is no room for compromise with true believers.
I don't watch the Super Bowl.
I didn’t say if agreed or disagreed with spending money on this spot. I addressed your premise that it hurt other needy people. But since you asked… I have no disagreement with one 30 second spot that promotes something positive. As of January 11th CBS had sold 58 half-minutes spots at an average of 2.5 million each. Most of those are probably for erectile dysfunction, insurance, and beer. And I don’t have a problem with that either… I bet most of the advertisers give charitably.
The ad may or may not be about the abortion issue. It could be about home schooling… it could be about anything. But it probably is about choosing not to have an abortion. In this context is not a political issue but a moral one. The laws concerning the abortion are political but not the voicing your personal opinion about it.
I think everyone has the right to contribute to the political process. Actually, I think everyone has a DUTY to do so. Tax exemption is not based on your mission – it is based on your PROFIT MOTIVE. FOTF nor Tebow will profit from this commercial… but perhaps one mommie and one baby will.
Please tell me why there is such a furor over Tebow wanting to tell his story in a paid ad? What are
the opponents so afraid of? Their rapid response is very telling indeed. Those that are always
preaching tolerance are, at times, the most intolerant. This is one of those times. What about
First Amendment rights??
"True believer"? I think that at some point the being growing inside a mother's womb is verifiably human. If you want to get strictly technical, it's DNA is human from the moment of conception when it has a full set of human DNA via sperm and egg. Much like a seed planted in the ground, a human being will grow once a fertilized egg implants in the womb unless natural circumstances prevent it.
At some point, I think we have to acknowledge that the being inside a woman is a human with all the basic rights that entails because to do otherwise risks eroding our perception of a human's right to life in any circumstance. One of Obama's czars has made the argument in his academic writings that a baby carried to term and birthed isn't actually a human being but that it "will ultimately develop into a human being." Once you are comfortable with denying basic human rights to one set of humans, you are much more confortable denying it to others.
In my beliefs, I prefer to error on the side of caution and think of a developing child as a human being entitled to the basic rights of a human being.
so youre pro choice, well what about the babies "choice" to live?
Babies get a choice as soon as they can live apart from the mother. Up until that point, choice is about the mother. If that offends you then don't have an abortion.
hey you can tell that to the baby as you kill it too…"Babies get a choice as soon as they can live apart from the mother. Up until that point, choice is about the mother. If that offends you then don't have an abortion. " You Libs are some sickos, sick in the head
and back to my original point miktollah, youre glad you werent an abortion right, well you should want the same for the unborn ya hippocrit
Tim Tebow for President, 2020!
As much as we may disagree I will thank you for your service and will say this is something to be respected.
How about you spend some of that retirement time with a book;
http://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Shrugged-Ayn-Rand/dp/...
You're dodging again.
This is absolutely THE silliest thing I have ever read. Liberals wish that Tebow was never born? I think Tebow should be able to express whatever view he has, but saying "it may persuade a woman to keep her baby"? It's so laughably insane that it doesn't even merit getting upset over. This is seriously the most childish piece of writing I have ever read by an adult. Is your view of liberals that warped that you really think that's how they think?
The fact that none of you are calling bulls**t on this shows me that nobody comes here but brain-dead a**holes. I'm speechless.
I volunteer to campaign for him.
Tebow – Tebow – Tebow
But you're expousing left wing talking points, all lies.
Name one lie I have told… a factual lie and not some disagreement like when does life begin.
Of course, you only say that when you think it benefits you. We're just following your playbook.
Just because NOW doesn't want the ad to be run doesn't mean they wish Tim wasn't born. Her choice to chose to keep him is not the debate here. The network has denied pro-choice ads from being run during the Super Bowl.
So Tim Tebow's mother selflessly decided to ignore her own health against the advice of doctors and have the baby… very compelling story. But did it really happen? Unlikely.
It turns out abortion under any circumstances has been illegal in the Philippians since 1930 and is punishable by six years in prison. It is very hard to believe that doctors would risk their freedom and offer to perform an abortion for an American.
What is very likely is that James Dobson and his "focus on the family" gang who are bankrolling this nonsense would lie to make for a compelling story. He has a good christian boy who loves the lord and agrees to be a spokes model for anti abortion zealots. Who cares if any of it is true. The faithful certainly don't care so nobody gets hurt.
This is a compelling story that makes a political point… but it never happened.
By not taxing churches, the government is prevented from directly interfering with how churches operate. By the same token, those churches are also prevented from directly interfering with how the government operates in that they cannot endorse any political candidates, they cannot campaign on behalf of any candidates, and they cannot attack any political candidate, or issue!
So NO, not everyone has the right to contribute to the political process!
Do you believe in the separation of church and State? Do you believe we should be governed from the pulpit?
Since you brought up China, were you aware that since the Supreme court decision, China can now play a role in the election process in the US, any corporation has the ability to help form future outcomes of elections, domestic or foreign!!
Hey Mago, missed out on the "Invasion of the Trolls", in response to the article by James O'Keefe? Interesting, a poster who goes by 'Trollinator' said that he knows of 3 sites that provide links to BigGov, etc. to trolls in order to provide the flying monkeys(ala Wizard of Oz) info on where to go in response to an article that really sticks in their collective craw. He said the names of these site are(I can only remember 2 of them, ha ha) 'Rumproast(how appropriate!) and Bettycrocker(don't know how they get away with that), I thought it should be Bettycrackhead!
These particular trolls were obsessed with weird, deviant sexual practices and they wore it on their sleeves. Kinda' fun but I got tired of not discussing an issue in a rational, logical fashion, after about 6 hours, ha ha. 
……………………….Hanzo
The only way China, or any other foreign corporation or entity(like George Soros) can contribute to the political process, is through a front group, like moveon.org. The original law, which the SCOTUS reverted to, was passed in 1907!! It has included prohibitions that expressly FORBID foreign corps. or entities from contributing. I suppose you only want Soros, ACORN, et al to be able to contribute? To insinuate that foreign entities will change the face of elections is absurd, you're espousing lib propoganda and talking points.Have you ever studied the law? BTW, the Chinese were caught contributing already, BEFORE McCain-Feingold. Guess who they gave to? BILL and HILLARY CLINTON. Sorry to burst your bubble with the truth…………………….Hanzo
And the tax exempt status that churches must seek came about post-1900! During the Revolutionary times, many of the leaders were preachers, speaking from the pulpit in FAVOR of Freedom and Liberty. The Founding Fathers would never have placed such restrictions on churches.BTW, find for me where the "seperation of church and state" is in the Constitution. It's NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION. Thomas Jefferson came up with the phrase in order to express his belief that no religion should be favored over another, in a private letter!!.Man, I wish people like you would actually study and learn the truth of these issues, not spout talking points. Don't you realize you're promulgating lies?? …………………………..Hanzo
Please read my response to hockeynation in response to his comments to you, as he only spouts misinformation in this regard.Thanks…………………..Hanzo
So are you advocating Moral Relativism? Who are you to judge others on their right to free speech? Furthermore, who are you to tell an organisation how to spend their funds? You sound like a Progressive Facist…………………………Hanzo
Oh those trolls! Remember, you have to use fire. Cutting them up into pieces results in more trolls.
Ha ha ha……..That's hilarious, perhaps that's why we're supposed to march with pitchforks and torches, pin them to the ground and apply fire.
A couple more sites to visit, if you want to stare into the face of insanity, are 'snarkopolitan',
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
'hillbuzz' and 'theteapartyisover.org.' This last site is particularly reprehensible, as they post pictures of 3 leaders of the Tea Party, misconstrue their positions on various issues and then list their phone numbers and urge people to call them, yeah. I wonder if mikatollah and syntax_game would consider this an attack on these people, as mika said James O'Keefe 'attacked' Landreiu and both said it was terrorism, ahhh the vagaries of doublespeak.
Go Saints! Become a fan of facebook page here: Colts Will Lose Super Bowl 2010!
I may have stepped too far. At the moment, foreign corporations may not spend any money in U.S. elections under a provision of federal election law that was untouched by the high court.
The more complicated question is how to treat U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies or American corporations that are controlled by foreign investors.
Before the court ruling, the issue was much more clear. Corporations, including some with foreign ties, could form political action committees (PACs), funded with voluntary and limited contributions from their executives and employees. But they could not spend money from their general treasuries to advocate for or against candidates for federal offices.
Not a big fan of the Clintons, and not at all surprising that China would want to support them, so you will have to step it up if you want to burst my bubble!!
Read more: Critics raise specter of foreign campaign spending – KansasCity.com
It is a fact of law that charitable organizations, including churches, which have tax-exempt status are NOT ALLOWED to participate in political campaigns on behalf of political candidates.
The first ten words of that First Amendment which declare, in no uncertain terms, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” A Jew can believe that eating pork is wrong, a Hindu can refuse a hamburger, and a fundamentalist Christian can believe that women came from Adam's spare rib, yet no governmental authority can pass laws based on these beliefs. A Jewish president can’t make it illegal for me to eat shellfish, for example.
Afghanistan's former government didn't permit this liberty. It required men to grow their beards a specific length or risk imprisonment, while the woman who refused to wear her body-length burqa robe would be publicly beaten, tortured, or stoned to death. When the Taliban were overthrown, hundreds of young men happily smiled for cameras as they enjoyed a collective shave, indulging with wild abandon a freedom that the global community would never think twice about. Others willingly chose to keep their beards in observance of religious dogma. The point is that all Afghans once again had the freedom to choose.
This is the difference between religious freedom, and religious fundamentalism. The first one is American. The second one is an enemy to everything America stands for.
Please be specific, when you say I am promulgating lies.
The 'specter' is something we've dealt with since 1907 until 2002. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
Easy, the seperation of church and state is not found in the Constitution. Therefore, yes, the 'people'(churches, specifically preachers) DO have a right to free speech. It's been wrongfully usurped by the federal government with the 'tax exempt' game.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
Lawsuits over violations of the separation of church and state rely on arguing that these are violations of people's constitutional rights. This means that confusing people with myths about what the Constitution really says and means is an important tool for those who want to undermine church/state separation and secularism in favor of some sort of theocratic order.
In arguing against church/state separation, Christian Nationalists promote myths, misconceptions, and even lies about the relationship between religion and government.
What?? Wow, what a load of innuendo, presumption and insinuation. Ok, genius, prove me wrong without your typical lib/statist/progressive/facist talking points. What a bunch of nonsensical tripe! Are you even serious? The Constituion was written as an assertion of GOD given rights, BTW. How do you like that? When attempting to make a point(?) using eloquent(?) words, your failure only serves to make you look doubly stupid. Just sayin'. Christian Nationalists? Where in the hell did you hear that one? Or did you just make it up? What a trip. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
We are going to have to agree to strongly disagree on this subject, and yes I did make that one up, and I like it more each time I say it.
I don't want any interference from corporate, religious or any other interest group that interfere with government, I want a government of the people, for the people.
We are going to have to agree to strongly disagree on this subject, and yes I did make that one up, and I like it more each time I say it.
I don't want any interference from corporate, religious or any other interest group that interfere with government, I want a government of the people, for the people.
Disagree about what? Because I'm stating the truth, and you aren't? I didn't say that I wanted a Theocracy, were in hell did you get that?Who said that restoring free speech in churches is interfering with the government? You make NO valid point here, whatsoever.I suppose you also believe that our form of government, as envisioned by the FF's is a democracy, right? Man, have you got a lot to learn, and it shows. I don't mean to offend you, but your ignorance on political and Constitutional issues is apalling, and you regurgitate pablum happily, without educating yourself beforehand. Yes, you are promulgating lies, and obviously you don't care. That's progressive facism, friend.Study the roots of progressivism also, you'll be stunned.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
We agree that religion has no place in governance, and we agree that all religions have the freedom of speech.
Is it possible that we misunderstand one another?
I don't misunderstand the fact that you didn't answer any of my questions posed tp you. I didn't say that religion has no place in governance, just that 1 religion shouldn't be favored over another, just as the FF's envisioned.You really should read the Constitution.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
The Constitution, a completely secular document, contains no references to God, Jesus or Christianity. It says absolutely nothing about the United States being officially Christian.
The preamble of the Constitution invokes the people of the United States. It does not invoke any sort of God
The Constitution forbids any religious test to hold office. A godless person is just as eligible as a godly one!
"It is true that the literal phrase 'separation of church and state' does not appear in the Constitution, but that does not mean the concept isn't there. The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…."
What does that mean? Thomas Jefferson, then president, declared that the American people through the First Amendment had erected a "wall of separation between church and state!
John F. Kennedy September 12, 1960, address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association:
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute–where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote–where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference–and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.
JFK
Are we sill in disagreement?
Yes, complete and total disagreement. You cite JFK as a Constitutional paragon or even a scholar thereof? Laughable. I think JFK would have been a fabulous president, don't get me wrong.The very fact he says(in your quote)that ministers shouldn't tell his parishoners how to vote is ludicrous and denies the minister his 1st Amendment Right, simply put.JFK, being a Catholic, said "Protestant minister'? Interesting.
You're lack of Constitutional understanding, nay, even the Framers Intent is glaringly obvious. You've not studied the actual memoirs of all the FF's, have you now? Perhaps you should start off by reading the Declaration of Independence, which is the 1st document of relevence, as it "sets up" the path for the "Bill of Rights" and the Constitution.What do the first 2 sentences say?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
What you advocate is the very thing that is going on right now all over America, where religious groups are taking over, or have already taken over the Republican party, in the pursuit of a theocracy, this is their goal, and they make no bones about it!! I know you say that you do not want a theocracy, but this is the very road that we are on.
Scalia's claim that "government derives its
authority from God" (as opposed to the people?) and it doesn't seem unreasonable to worry that we're inching toward some form of theocracy in the United States. But every step toward theocracy is a step away from freedom and progress. If our democracy is to remain healthy, political movements based on religion really must be resisted.
Tin-foal hat gettin' kinda' tight on ya'?The Crhistians are coming! The Christians are coming!OMG!!
Would you like for me to cite to yourself just a few of the literally thousands of references, including SCOTUS decision which stated that<yes indeed, America IS a CHRISTIAN NATION?
How many times is it stated that our Rights our GOD-GIVEN, not granted by government or other MEN. That way our God-given Rights cannot be taken away, as a privelege may be, by some nameless, faceless bureaucrat, acting on a whim from afar.
You're lucky that you've got God-given Rights.We are all lucky for this fact. Our Constitution was based on Christian principles, fact and not debatable……..
…….Interesting that you ignored almost all of my questions posed to you in this thread.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,Hanzo
Nothing personal, but your understanding of our Constitution(Bill of Rights and the Amendments), as well as the Declaration of Independence, is rudimentary at best.You've got plenty to learn, that's all.
Which form of governance I advocate for our country is unknown to you,obviously.Please don't pretend to know my thoughts.I'm fine with a Representative Federal Republic, as envisioned by the Framers.You erroneously stated we have a Democracy, how common.The FF's knew that sometimes democracy can degenerate into mob rule, the general populace being quite volatile, at times.This is why we have the system of checks and balances.
Questions?I'd be happy to teach you about our Constitution, our FF's and politics in general, especially the genesis of organic movements.
You will have to repost your questions that I may have missed, I really thought I had answered them all.
Let me pose a question to you.
If there was a political Islamic movement in the US with the clear goal of a theocratic Islamic State, would the same religious political freedoms that you so clearly embrace still apply?
Ho hum."If there was a political movement in the…".
Ok,pay attention here.If a movement has , as its aims, a plan to subvert the Constitution(which theocratic Muslims would do, to implement Shariah Law, which I suppose is what you're driving at),should they have the same religious political freedoms(?, meaning UNABRIDGED Freedom of Speech,?)?Once again, I'm not sure of your purpose in asking a question such as that.If the Muslims are citizens of the U.S. they enjoy Rights provided by our Constitution. If they are advocating the overthrow of the Constitution, this is Sedition, at least, perhaps Treason.Are you attempting to trap me into stating that I'd approve of a takeover of the Gov't. by a "Christian" group, or removal of the Constitution by a Christian Theocratic State?Sorry, not playing, this is going nowhere.,,,,,,,,Hanzo