Birth or Not! Whether is a hoax or it is real, it is still Wrong.

There is some buzz about the Internet site  Pete and Alisha Arnold, a young couple from Apple Valley, MN is leaving the fate of their unborn child to voters on the Internet.  They have set up a blog, with voting that allows visitors to vote on whether they couple should give birth or have an abortion.

Or are they?

Steven Ertelt at is calling foul.  Steven cites sources from both the pro-life and pro-choice camps.  Some claims center around the date  the domain was purchased.  Pete?s past work with pro-life groups also problematic.

The birth of a child is nothing short of a miracle.  It has been over twelve years  since I learned my wife was pageant with our first child.  I remember  like it was yesterday the range and intensity of the emotions I was feeling.  I was excited and scared.  Who would have thought me, as a dad?  Never once did the thought of abortion cross my mind.  I knew I wasn?t going to be perfect,  but I was going to try.  God has granted us this gift.  I was going to do my very best to take care her.  Besides, she the one who is going to pick my nursing home.

This web sites reminds of stunt several years ago, where a teen couple was going to have sex live on the Internet.  As it turned out it was a huge hoax to bring attention to the problem teens and sex.

This time, we are talking about a child.  This stunt, whether it be for real or just a hoax, is just plain wrong.  Every child deserves a chance.  While a child may not be born into best of circumstances, that child still deserves that  chance.  If for some reason the Arnolds don?t feel they can take on the rigors of parenthood; there are number of couples who are.  If they can?t find a couple, my wife and I will take in that child.  To leave the decision whether or not to give birth to this child to the Internet is totally outrageous.   If this is a hoax,  I?m not laughing.

12 Replies to “Birth or Not! Whether is a hoax or it is real, it is still Wrong.”

  1. Miss Pross

    O/T So here is how the Daschles make money.
    Another example of selective reporting I suppose all of us know about Chertoff’s connection to the scanners. Did you know Linda Daschle probably is much more heavily involved? A sample of the selectivity from usatoday:

    “WASHINGTON ? The companies with multimillion-dollar contracts to supply American airports with body-scanning machines more than doubled their spending on lobbying in the last five years and hired several high-profile former government officials to advance their causes in Washington, records show.
    L-3 Communications, which has sold $39.7 million worth of the machines to the federal government, spent $4.3 million to influence Congress and federal agencies during the first nine months of this year, up from $2.1 million in 2005, lobbying data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show. Last year, the company spent $5.5 million on lobbying.

    Its lobbyists include Linda Daschle, a prominent Democratic figure in Washington, who is a former Federal Aviation Administration official.

    Rapiscan Systems, meanwhile, has spent $271,500 on lobbying so far this year, compared with $80,000 five years earlier. It has faced criticism for hiring Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security secretary, who has been a prominent proponent of using scanners to foil terrorism. Officials with Chertoff’s firm and Rapiscan say Chertoff was not paid to promote scanner technology. It spent $440,000 on lobbying in 2009.”

  2. Disgusting none the less...

    I think this is a stunt to appall people across the country at the act of abortion as birth control and inturn advance the pro-life cause.

    If you as an individual have a negative emotional reaction towards this couple so casually willing to have and abortion it will subliminally implant an uncomortable or negative emotional reaction towards the act of abortion in future discussions.

    It is designed to infuence our emotions and help us discover how we feel when we have a hand in the abortion process.

    Then again I could be wrong…

    I prefer the video below as a method to get people to think about abortion.

    I wonder if the story about the couple having an abortion is like the movie the Life of David Gale tried to be for the death penalty.

  3. Nick Nemec

    I call BS. These are a couple of pro-life extremists trying to get attention. Not as extreme as people who kill MDs in an attempt to stop abortions but in the same camp. Their plan is not well thought through, kind of like the 20 something McCain staffer who reported a false attack and scratched a backwards “B” on her cheek.

  4. Bill Fleming

    They actually make the opposite point pretty well. The abortion issue isn’t anything we should we voting about. Period.

  5. I Wanna Be Elected. . . Alice

    No, you’re sure right Bill. We should leave the choice to 9 old men 47 years ago using 50 year old technology and understanding of what constitutes life to make decisions for us. Yeah, much better.

  6. Bill Fleming

    Alice, there will ALWAYS be only one person who has the “moral authority” to decide on that issue. That’s the fact of it. The rest is just society trying to deal with that fact.

  7. I Wanna Be Elected. . . Alice

    I would agree. Then, many, sadly, exercise their moral authority in an immoral way. I would simply say that the states, by our federal constitution, be allowed to limit(or not) the immoral act of abortion as it limits many other immoral acts. It is not a federally guaranteed right. It is a state issue.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.