Pam’s Story and Sanctity of Human Life Sunday


Pam’s story is ‘anti-abortion’ and that is a good thing! Even”pro-choice” people have said many times that they are not “pro-abortion” and that being pro-choice doesn’t mean one believes abortion is a good thing. So why isn’t the true story of a woman choosing life over abortion with a good outcome a blessing for everyone to celebrate?

If you read what is written here, perhaps you read the post on Snopes and their inability to determine that Pam’s Story concerning the birth of her son, Tim Tebow, was true. They gave as their excuse that abortion isn’t legal in the Philippines unless the life of the mother is at risk. Pam clearly stated that the doctors thought she should have an abortion all the way through to the seventh month of her pregnancy in order to save her life.

Abortion to protect the life of the mother is legal in the Philippines. Perhaps this needs to be explained to Snopes in order for them to be able to determine the veracity of the story. The greater question, however, is should a pro-life commercial be considered controversial and should those who want to produce such an ad be pressured to cease and desist?

When ‘Focus on the Family’ bought commercial time to tell Pam’s story in 2006 there was an outcry from those who are apparently “pro-abortion” that the story might contain an “anti-abortion”message. I say “pro-abortion” because “choice” by its very nature means that some people will choose not to abort and that choice will be accepted and respected, as well it should be. When a person or group fails to recognize that life is also a ‘choice’ it follows that they have shown themselves to be, not pro-choice, but pro-abortion.

This seems to be the forgotten aspect by those who carry the ‘pro-choice’ banner. Women like Mrs. Pam Tebow have their integrity questioned or their story stifled simply because of the prejudice our nation now embraces against those who choose against abortion.

This is another example of our ‘up-side down land’.

 January 22nd 2012 is Sanctity of Human Life Sunday

This year perhaps all who are pro-life will continue to work together to support women and families like Pam and the Tebow family in their decision for life. May God continue to richly bless her for this choice.

Advertisements

About jlue

I am a grandmother of seven and I like to garden, read, study the Bible, and spend time with family. I am not very politically active, but very interested in who is elected to lead our country.
This entry was posted in abortion, Christianity. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Pam’s Story and Sanctity of Human Life Sunday

  1. smijer says:

    Good thing dead horses feel no pain, huh?

    The penal code regarding abortion contains a general prohibition on abortion. Although no exceptions are specified, it may be interpreted to permit abortion to save the life of a pregnant woman. [emphasis added] – from footnote here

    What is the moral of PT’s story as you see it? I hope not that the government should require a woman to risk her health and life if there is a possibility of having a celebrity athlete in the family?

    Mrs Tebow choice was courageous and selfless. We can honor her willingness to risk self-sacrifice. We can be glad for her because of her good outcome. I’m not sure how this can be parlayed into an anti-abortion message without making that message repulsive to its intended audience, though.

    Like

    • jlue says:

      I’m not sure how this can be parlayed into an anti-abortion message without making that message repulsive to its intended audience, though.

      I did not think it should have been considered an “anti-abortion” message in the beginning. I did and still believe it should be considered a “pro-life” message and one to celebrate. It was back in 2006 that the, (what else can I call them?)pro-abortion proponents used the term to attempt to keep the story off the air. Then Snopes took up the mantra when ‘Pam’s Story’ began to circulate. My point entirely is that it should be pro-life and even ‘pro-choice’ people should not resent it being told and celebrated.

      Like

      • smijer says:

        I did not think it should have been considered an “anti-abortion” message in the beginning.

        That’s what I thought, but this morning I read what you wrote:

        Pam’s story is ‘anti-abortion’ and that is a good thing!

        That’s why I said something.

        Like

      • jlue says:

        I was simply agreeing with those who had refused to define it any other way. My hope is that through this examination of their own terminology some might begin to see that many who claim to be “pro-choice” are actually not taking “pro-choice” positions. They are taking “pro-abortion” positions. A ‘Pro-Choice’ person will accept Pam’s story at face value and celebrate with her. Maybe I am not doing a good job getting that across, but I did try.

        Like

  2. Pingback: A Story of a Crisis Pregnancy | The Theological Arsenal

Comments are closed.