The Non-Abortions Named Tim Tebow, Tiger Woods, and Rick Hoyt
Submitted by Stand for Life Blog
When I was watching the college football championship game between Florida and Oklahoma, I thought about what an amazing player Florida’s quarterback Tim Tebow is and the tremendous story his life has been. He won the Heisman Trophy last year as the best college player and finished second this year. Tim is known as a very strong Christian, an inspirational speaker, and team leader. He has gone on several mission trips throughout the world and has been the role model for many, either in or out of sports.
If his parents would have followed the doctor’s advice, he wouldn’t even be here. In 1985, his family was living in the Philippines doing mission work when just before becoming pregnant with Tim, his mother, Pam, fell into a coma. She contracted amoebic dysentery, a bacteria transmitted through contaminated drinking water. Amoebic dysentery is the leading cause of death in the Philippines. On her road to recovery, she received a series of strong medications. Pam discontinued the medications when she discovered the pregnancy, but doctors told her that there were problems with the fetus. Later doctors informed her that the placenta had detached from the uterine wall, a condition known as placental abruption, which can deprive the fetus of oxygen and nutrients. Pam’s doctors expected a stillbirth and told her that she should get an abortion, but because of her faith, she decided to keep the child. Tim’s dad, Bob Tebow, said, “God, if you want another preacher in this world, then give him to me, and I will raise him.” Tim was born on August 14, 1987, skinny and malnourished, but otherwise healthy.
If you think about it, because of a court case, there are quite a few accomplished people born since 1973 who could very easily have been aborted. In the case of Doe v. Bolton, which was a companion case to Roe v. Wade in 1973, the Court stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her “health.” The Court defined “health” as physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age. In other words, the woman’s health aspect could cover almost any reason for abortion. A woman could say that her child would cause her stress, or she is not ready to have a family, and that would be sufficient.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin, co-founders of Google, were born in 1973 after the court cases were decided. These brilliant minds could easily have been vanquished on a whim, if their parents had so decided.
Tiger Woods will probably go down in history as the best golfer of all time. If his parents had just thought that he was going to cause emotional stress on them, they could have easily had him aborted.
Obviously, many famous people, such as Angelina Jolie, Peyton Manning, Reese Witherspoon, Beyonce, Kobe Bryant, etc., who were born in the last 35 years, could have been killed before birth.
There have been quite a few accomplished people throughout history that because of circumstances surrounding their birth, many believe an abortion would have been justified. There’s a well-known story about a woman that had tuberculosis and a man that had syphilis. Together they had four children. Their first child was born blind. The second child was stillborn. The third child was deaf and dumb, and their fourth was born with tuberculosis. When she was pregnant with their fifth child, many in today’s society would think that an abortion would have been appropriate. That fifth child was Beethoven.
In the world today we have thousands, if not millions, of people that are not as well known, but since they weren’t aborted, they have had an inspirational impact on those around them. The story of Dick and Rick Hoyt in the following video is a testament to that:
There are many examples of great accomplishments from the famous and not-so-famous that have had a positive influence in our world. How many other people could have been an inspiration to us if they were just given the chance to be born?
January 12th, 2009 at 2:10 am
I am prolife. I would support a Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe vs Wade. But, I have a problem with the predominant prolife emphasis on teaching abstinence as the only avenue of curbing the number of abortions. It seems to me that the prolife movement is more interested in controlling sexual behavior rather than reducing the number of abortions. If we really want fewer abortions, why not promote practices that would prevent pregnancy?
January 12th, 2009 at 8:52 am
You ponder, “How many other people could have been an inspiration to us if they were just given the chance to be born?”
There are over 42 million abortions performed every year, worldwide.
Over 1 million of those are performed just in the United States every year.
Worldwide, that’s more than 100,000 potential inspirations killed EVERY DAY.
Imagine.
January 20th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
I want zero abortions. How does an insistence on abstinence achieve that? Youth who sign pledges to abstain from sex end up giving in to sex. They are afraid to ask for help with birth control because of their pledge to abstinence. If we want fewer abortions, we must do whatever it takes to achieve that end. Maybe that means birth control. Maybe that means condoms. I am more interested in reducing the number of murdered babies than I am in controlling sexual behavior.
January 25th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
the sexual act is made to create new life–babies! Yes, we should teach abstinence. Sex should and CAN be saved for marriage wherein children can be welcomed into a family.
You don’t teach your kid dodge cars but to stay out of the street… We should not be lowering our standards. I’m 21 and only inte
January 25th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
that is: I’m 21 and only interested in abstinence until I can give myself to my spouse in marriage.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
I believe one hundred percent in abstinence. It is the only sure fire way of preventing unintended pregnancies. What about those who are not willing to abstain. They really exist out there. They will not abstain. Do we want the pregnancies of those people? Or, do we want to prevent them? Do we want to control that persons sexual practices, or do we want to prevent the death of a baby?
Chris
January 26th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I taught my sons abstinence only. It worked for them. They are now 20 and 23. Not all young people have fathers and mothers who will work as hard as I and my sons mother worked. Do you want to control sexual behavior or save babies? That is the key question. What is our goal? Do we want to stop the murder of the unborn, or stop people from having sex?
Chris
January 29th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
I think many conservatives would sacrifice the lives of the unborn if they thought there was a way of controlling the sexual activities of people.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Wow, no one really wants to confront the issue. The issue is this: Killing Babies is unacceptable. We can stop that murder by trying to control the sexual behavior of all Americans or we can stop it by stopping unintended pregnancies. Which is your choice. Talk to me.
Chris
April 15th, 2009 at 5:19 am
Imagine how many rapists, murderers, muggers, and crack addicts aren’t around because of abortion.
Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner proved in their book “Freakonomics” that there is a direct correlation between regional increases in abortion in the 70s and a drastic drop in violent crime rates in the same regions in the 90’s. That is to say that abortion lowers crime rate. Period. It makes practical sense, pregnancies that are considered for abortion, when brought to term, aren’t likely to have a high quality of life. Usually financial and emotional stability in that childs lif will be questionable. Many of these children end up in foster homes, putting them at higher risk of sexual assault(in turn making them more likely to commit more sex crimes, and possibly more unwanted pregnancies).
The individual situations surrounding any pregnancy, and whether or not an abortion is needed are so complex that acblanket statement that all abortions are wrong misses too many points. A fourteen year old girl addicted to cocaine is not fit to be a mother. The environment that girl could provide for her child shouldn’t be wished upon anyone. Often an abortion is chosen as a path to lessen suffering.
April 15th, 2009 at 5:24 am
Imagine how many rapists, murderers, muggers, and crack addicts aren’t around because of abortion.
Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner proved in their book “Freakonomics” that there is a direct correlation between regional increases in abortion in the 70s, and a drastic drop in violent crime rates in the same regions in the 90’s.
That is to say that abortion lowers crime rate.
Period.
It makes practical sense. Pregnancies that are considered for abortion, when brought to term, aren’t likely to have a high quality of life. Usually the financial and emotional stability in that child’s life will be questionable. Many of these children end up in foster homes, putting them at higher risk of sexual assault(in turn making them more likely to commit more sex crimes, and possibly more unwanted pregnancies).
The individual situations surrounding any pregnancy, and whether or not an abortion is needed, are so complex that a blanket statement like “all abortions are wrong” misses too many points. A fourteen year old girl addicted to cocaine is not fit to be a mother. The environment that girl could provide for her child shouldn’t be wished upon anyone. Often an abortion is chosen as a path to lessen suffering.
How many people are only alive today because the murderer that would have brutally raped and killed them was aborted?
May 21st, 2009 at 3:46 pm
And how many kids who would’ve come up with a cure for cancer, or become friends with someone who didn’t have any, or beat the odds and although their parents didn’t have the best intentions, they were able to go to college, graduate, and contribute to the world. A fourteen year old girl addicted to cocaine is not fit to be a mother, but people change and addiction can be beat. And as far as an abortion as a path to lessen suffering, most women who get abortions suffer from depression, anxiety, and many contemplate suicide. And btw, those who are victims of sexual assault does not mean they are more likely to commit more sex crimes. They have just as much choice as the next person who wasn’t the victim of a sexual crime. I know because I am the victim of a sex crime. People shouldn’t look at themselves as a victim and make up excuses as to why they continue to do things that had hurt them in the past. People should realize hey that hurt me so I’m not going to do it to others. So point blank its a choice. Abortion should not be thought of as a means to get rid of “potential threats” to society when they could also be “potential saviors to society.”