Recently a viewer brought to my attention one of the most disturbing things I have ever seen on the internet.  A Minnesota couple, Pete and Alicia Arnold, started a website called http://www.birthornot.com/ On the site they chronicle Alicia’s pregnancy after 10 years of trying to have children, including three miscarriages.  They post daily entries about the anxiety of bringing children into this world, ultrasound pictures of the fetus and even a video.   The couple is educated and articulate.  So far none of this should raise any red flags as these kinds of blogs are common on the Internet as people have a bizarre sense of reverse voyeurism where they want others watching them – even if their lives are profoundly dull and boring.  “Status update; I’m eating sandwich!”  I think we can thank Youtube, Twitter and Facebook for that.  They should come up with a new all-in-one social media website that rolls all three into one, it could be called… You Twit Face.

What sets Pete and Alicia’s site apart is that they have invited readers to vote online as to whether they are going to abort their baby or not.  Yes, you read that right!  They have emphatically claimed from the start of the pregnancy that they will let the vote count alone determine whether they keep and raise the child, or whether they murder their own unborn child.  They have set December 5th 2010 as the decision date since that is just prior to the 20 week window for a legal abortion in Minnesota.  It is incredibly unbelievable considering that they have reported that the baby is wiggling and kicking and has already been identified as a boy!  When I first saw the site I thought it was either some sort of cruel hoax to stir the abortion debate, or perhaps the most irresponsible thing I have ever seen from a set of perspective parents.  What has the opinion of a bunch of random strangers on the Internet got to do with whether you should have your own baby or murder it?

My more carnal side immediately started thinking about starting an alternative site where we could vote on whether we should somehow abort the lives of Pete and Alicia.  People could vote, donate a dollar or two, and then with the money we could hire a hit-man and bump the couple off.  It seems like a reasonable response to me and it is biblical to boot… Exodus 21:22+23 …check it out.  On the other hand, it may be too vindictive and Old Testament for most.  (Note for those that don’t understand sarcasm:  I am clearly joking. I am obviously taking a swipe at the absurdity of letting strangers decide online whether a human should live or die, and was applying the same sick logic back to Pete and Alicia.
A joke is rarely funny if you have to explain it.  I am not going to start a website called You Twit Face either.)
In fact, 100’s of more noble people than me have already written and offered to adopt the child, begging the couple not to abort it.

As of this writing 1.5 million people have already voted with 75% saying; ABORT.  What kind of sick people are these?  Have we been transported back to the time of the Rome Colosseum where the spectators call for the death of the gladiators, only instead of warriors the participants are tiny, unborn, defenseless children?  I’m sorry, but this just angers me and completely sours any faith I might have had in humanity.  Now, understand that at this stage of the game, the pro-abortion lobby has gotten into the act and is influencing the outcome of the vote with the use of internet voting-bots.  But even before that happened, over 50% were calling for them to abort.

The latest development in this story is that Pete is claiming that the whole thing was a stunt to reopen the abortion debate.  Apparently he has pro-life leanings and has wanted the baby from the beginning.  His wife Alicia however, is still posting that that is not true and she had every intention of following through with the abortion if that was how the vote went.  Although she now sounds like she might be planning on having the baby, she is still contending that until the fetus can survive on its own outside the womb it is not a viable human being.  That is the stupidest argument ever for abortion!  For those of us that have already had children, we know they cannot survive outside the womb till they are about… 29 YEARS old!   Seriously though, even once a baby is born, it cannot survive without constant parental care for months if not years.  I would argue that once a baby is outside the womb, in many ways it is far more dependent upon the parents for survival.

I will watch this sickening saga south of the border with disgust, but I can only hope it is nothing more than a cruel hoax.  Meanwhile on this side of the border we have a tremendous story of political heroism on the same subject.  Rod Bruinooge who is the Member of Parliament for Winnipeg South, and a member of our church, has launched a bold and courageous fight in the House of Commons.   Rod has been an outspoken voice for the unborn ever since he was elected in 2004.  He even turned down an opportunity to work with Native Affairs (his nationality) to chair an all party Pro-Life Caucus whose goal is to work for the protection of the unborn.  Rod has laid his political career on the line for this controversial and often unpopular cause.  He has repeatedly stated that, “Unborn children have less legal value in Canada than a human kidney.” In a letter he submitted to the National Post, he made this statement: “I have no choice but to advocate for the unborn and seek to have their value restored in my Canada. Our collective future depends on it.” I have great respect for Rod Bruinooge and regardless of your political leanings, so should you.  I see him not unlike William Wilberforce who dedicated his entire political career to fight for the end of human slavery in England.  It took him 39 years and cost him any political ambitions that he may have had, but in the end he won the battle, hearing only on his death bed that the English Parliament had banned slavery.

In the political life of a backbencher, they might have one shot at introducing a private members bill into the legislative agenda.  For Rod’s opportunity he has sponsored a bill he is calling Roxanna’s Law.  Roxanna Fernando was a young Winnipeg woman who got pregnant.  When she told her boyfriend Nathanael Plourde she was expecting he tried to coerce her into having an abortion.  When she refused after several attempts, he took her out for Valentine’s Day and then later beat her 20 times with a wrench.  He bound her with tape and threw her into his trunk.  Then he and a friend drove her to the edge of the city and beat her to death with hockey sticks before leaving her bloodied, lifeless pregnant body in the snow bank.

The pair were convicted and received life sentences but that does little to change the fact that it is not only the unborn that are at risk in Canada, but often their mothers.  Roxanne’s Law would change all that making it illegal to even try to coerce a woman into having an abortion.  Rod knows that he is swimming upstream with this bill, but he also knows that it is a fight that could be won if the grass roots gets behind it.  Rod has an excellent website dedicated to the bill. http://www.roxanneslaw.ca/ Please visit it and more importantly sign the petition in support of the bill.  You can even print the petition off from the website and circulate it around amongst your church and friends.  This is a battle worth fighting. Let’s help Rod win this one.  I believe we can do it if we work together, and it could become the first victory in a battle that we have been losing for way too long.