Who's Afraid of a Super Bowl Ad?

It's been widely reported recently that pro-choice groups have worked themselves into a lather over a pro-life ad featuring Tim Tebow and his mother that is set to air during the Super Bowl.

Chief among the handwringers is the National Organization for Women, whose president, Terry O'Neill, noted that she has "respect for the private choices made by women such as Pam Tebow", but has "condemned the planned ad as 'extraordinarily offensive and demeaning.'"

She further commented:

That's not being respectful of other people's lives. It is offensive to hold one way out as being a superior way over everybody else's. [emphasis added]

Yes, because everyone knows it's "offensive" when someone has the audacity to opine that civilization is superior to barbarism. Or that perseverance is superior to sloth. Or that freedom is superior to slavery.

To her credit, O'Neill's comments are nothing if not clarifying, for they make plain the fact that to the pro-choice mind, there is no objective moral distinction between, on the one hand, allowing a baby to be born, and, on the other, aborting her. Indeed, there can't be; otherwise, the pro-choice argument collapses in on itself.

It's because of comments like these that I've often thought that one of the best things that could happen to the pro-life movement is for the pro-abortion choice movement to get its own 24-hour cable channel.

Just give them a camera, give them a microphone, and let them talk. And talk. And talk some more.

The more they seek to rationalize their beliefs, the more self-evidently repulsive their arguments become to The Average Person.

It's no wonder, then, that the number of pro-abortion choice Americans continues to dwindle.