news-record.com

BLOGS

The Front Pew

The controversy of tellling Pam and Tim Tebow's story

After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, Pam Tebow  ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child. She later gave birth to Tim Tebow, who won the 2007 Heisman Trophy and helped his Florida team win two BCS championships.

The controversy is whether an ad, funded by Focus on the Family, should be allowed to play during the Super Bowl. Should she get the chance to share her story?

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Get A Clue

January 27, 2010 - 6:07 am EST

Any advertisement which passes the network's rules for such advertising should air. Heck, if they have football-playing beer bottles they'll accept just about anything. Let the Tebow ad run.
But here's the funny part. From what I've read, the point is, "Don't abort, otherwise you could have aborted a fine athlete" or something as simplistic. I believe--as someone who knows conception is when life begins and who supports a personal decision made by a woman and her physician should they choose to terminate that life within the legal limits--I believe this is absolutely the wrong way to go about taking an anti-abortion stance. There are most likely dozens of riff raff out there per every Tebow whose mother didn't abort them. It's an appeal to vanity instead of the value of life itself.
Besides, when you're talking about abortion it's already too late. If you're talking about abortion you've already skipped all the talk--and action--required for boys and girls to learn self-respect for themselves and each other...so that as they grow to be men and women they know "No!" means no, hook-ups and casual sex are disrespectful to one's self, let alone one's partner, and there are better ways to get to know someone.
So run the ad. But at those Super Bowl rates it's a real waste of money.

nemo0037

January 27, 2010 - 7:48 am EST

Erm... what is the controversy here? Is anyone opposing the notion that the Focus on the Family people should have the right to flush millions of their dollars down the rat-hole?

Similarly, this athlete may lose millions of dollars in endorsement deals by being an anti-choice spokes-body, but so what? One would think that companies are somehow OBLIGATED to toss money at every sports star around, the way some folks talk.

I agree with Clue's point on the actual message -- "don't abort your pregnancy, because you could be throwing away a sports star"? I've heard that before. "What if Beethoven had been aborted?" My response is "What if Hitler had been?"

kuranes

February 1, 2010 - 7:24 pm EST

I agree that "what might have been" is a silly argument either way; who knows what might have been? But I also predict that the people trying to censor the ad are the very same people who are always bragging about how tolerant and open-minded they are, as opposed to, well, Focus on the Family.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search