Bang! Zoom! Sally Jenkins goes off!

It’s one thing for a nobody-former-Dem-former-feminist-blogger like me to say this sort of stuff; for a mainstream journalist writing in the Washington Post, a defense of Tim Tebow and a pro-life ad during Super Bowl time is truly noteworthy.

This is dynamic truth-speaking to a stagnant and hypocritical establishment. This is someone who claims to be liberal actually writing like a liberal -as liberalism used to be defined; it is someone secure enough in her own abilities to reason that she is not afraid to allow others their right to their own opinion.

This is someone who is drawing a line in the sand and saying, “that’s enough, what is wrong with you people; do you even know what freedom is, or how un-free you have made yourselves and your little worlds?”

You have to read it all. It’s so good it’s hard to excerpt but here is a bit:

As statements at Super Bowls go, I prefer the idea of Tebow’s pro-life ad to, say, Jim McMahon dropping his pants, as the former Chicago Bears quarterback once did in response to a question. We’re always harping on athletes to be more responsible and engaged in the issues of their day, and less concerned with just cashing checks. It therefore seems more than a little hypocritical to insist on it only if it means criticizing sneaker companies, and to stifle them when they take a stance that might make us uncomfortable.

I’m pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I’ve heard in the past week, I’ll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the “National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time.” For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow’s 30-second ad hasn’t even run yet, but it already has provoked “The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us” to reveal something important about themselves: They aren’t actually “pro-choice” so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Now that is one righteous rant!
Kudos and much appreciation to Sally Jenkins, who remains her own woman and manages to repudiate the soft-fascism that says “conform or be destroyed,” the side of incessant spin and double-talk. Good for her. Good for us. Perhaps other women who have long ceased to see their views represented in the rhetoric of the “officially sanctioned women” will have the courage to follow Jenkins’ example and speak up. Hurrah! I’m going to file this under “remaking America!” H/T Li’l Bro Thom.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey has more thoughts:

When groups like NOW want to silence people like the Tebows, they’re doing so to protect their own turf. The ad asks people to choose life, not to ban abortion. If NOW really was pro-choice, they’d see nothing invalid about showing the end result of one choice and the faith that carried the Tebows from that terrifying diagnosis to the pinnacle of athletic and scholarly success. Tebow represents hope in the midst of hopelessness. NOW doesn’t want people to have hope; they want women to buy abortions, and this ugly response has made that crystal clear.

Joseph Bottum has a few thoughts of his own, too

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Bender

    **They aren’t actually “pro-choice” so much as they are pro-abortion**

    Yes, this incident and all the fights over those “Choose Life” license plates puts the lie to the claim that “no one is pro-abortion.” When there is only one acceptable “choice” — the choice to abort — then that is pro-abortion, not “pro-choice” and it is specious to continue to assert that no one is pro-abortion.

  • Pingback: uberVU - social comments

  • Gayle Miller

    Tebow is an example of the best of young American manhood in every way! God bless his wonderful mother and the choice she made.

  • Western Chauvinist

    I just wish that when writers make charges like this:

    “Some people will care that the ad is paid for by Focus on the Family, a group whose former spokesman, James Dobson, says loathsome things about gays.”

    they would give an example. “Loathsome” is pretty strong language and Dr. Dobson doesn’t strike me as a hate-monger. When the SpongeBob “gay” controversy erupted, I heard from an FOTF employee that people were wearing buttons with the message, “Hate the sin, love the Sponge.” Is that loathsome?

    Otherwise, I commend Sally Jenkins for the courage to speak out against her ideological allies. Very refreshing.

  • YogusBearus

    A very well written and courageous article. OK Vikings, do whatever you have to do to draft this guy.

  • Pingback: The Anchoress | A First Things Blog