Birth or Not

[Jenn! 918]

http://www.birthornot.com/

What do you think? Publicity stunt? If not, it's horrific!

[decocker 7,198]

i was reading that yesterday - crazy - i think it is a publicity/stunt something, not sure exactly..but, the whole premise just doesn't make sense. at all.

[nab 74]

oh i feel so left out nothing loads

[^_^ 5,021]

http://www.birthornot.com/

What do you think? Publicity stunt? If not, it's horrific!

That link made Websense unhappy.

[Jenn! 918]

It's not working for me now either...I wonder if they took down the blog.

The Arnolds are having a baby. Unless the public votes to have the child aborted. Meet the couple behind Birthornot.com, where "you can vote and choose whether we abort or keep our unborn child."Pete and Alisha Arnold, both 30, both tech professionals, live in the Minneapolis suburb of Apple Valley and have been married for 10 years. Since September, they've blogged about their expected child at birthornot.com, posting health updates about the mother and the fetus (which will be 17 weeks-old tomorrow), and ultrasound pictures and video. But at the top of the blog is a poll hosted by PollDaddy.com. The question: "Should We Give Birth or Have an Abortion?" "Give Birth" has 46 percent of the vote at the moment, with "Have an Abortion" at 54 percent. The poll closes on December 7th.

Pete told us over the phone that on that day he plans to check Polldaddy's records to make sure there hasn't been any double-voting or other evidence of fraud and then he and Alisha will use the results to decide whether to keep the baby. They'll have two days to make a decision before the 20th week of Alisha's pregnancy ends, and, with it, her last chance to get an abortion. The poll will influence their decision heavily, the couple said by phone this evening, but it won't be binding. "It's kind of like Congress. They might vote for something, but the president has the final veto. If it's overwhelming one way or the other, that will carry a lot more weight."

That someone would do this is almost impossible to believe, of course. We asked the Arnolds if this was some sort of a prank. "No, it's not. We are taking this very seriously," Pete replied. We then asked if this was some sort of convoluted pro-life stunt. Alisha laughed. "It's definitely not a pro-life campaign," she said. "I believe in a woman's right to choose."

According to the couple, they've been unsure about whether they're ready to be parents and have concluded that the best way to proceed is to ask random people on the Internet if they should have the child. (Tests have revealed that the fetus is a boy.) Alisha said that two pregnancies ended in two miscarriages in the past year and a half. During the second pregnancy, the couple bought the birthornot.com domain, and were in the process of deciding whether to put the birth up to a vote when they lost the baby. When Alisha got pregnant a third time a few months ago, they decided to launch birthornot.com.

Pete, who described himself as a Libertarian, framed the couple's majority-rule abortion as kind of an extreme civics lesson that he hoped would bring the abortion debate home. "Voting is such an important part of who we are as a people," Pete said. "Here's a chance where people can be heard about whether they are pro-choice or whether they are pro-life, and it makes a difference in the real world."

We pointed out an obvious flaw with his logic: The vast majority of people who are pro-choice aren't pro-abortion, so it wouldn't figure that they would automatically vote for the abortion option. The only people who would probably vote for the abortion are trolls who want to piss off pro-lifers. (In fact the anarchic message board 4chan has already hijacked the poll a couple times, tilting it to the "abortion" side.) Pete countered that during elections, "people do silly stuff all the time, and their votes get counted anyway."

We're not sure what to make of Pete and Alisha Arnold, to be honest. But here are three possibilities:

• 1) It's is an idiotic prank. Pete and Alisha are intent on becoming famous any way they can, and they've hit on an outrageous way to get media coverage. But if this all was a prank, wouldn't they have gotten the word out before now? They've been blogging since September
• 2) This is a pro-life stunt. Pete said he's a non-practicing Catholic, while Alisha is a Methodist. Although the Arnolds describe themselves as political independents with Libertarian leanings, Alisha likes Glenn Beck on Facebook, and a Google search turns up an old pro-Bush comment Pete made on CNN. (Pete said he voted for Bush in 2000, but not in 2004.) Could this site be a confused parable to illustrate the peril of putting an unborn baby's life in the hands of voters?
• 3) It's true. Pete and Alisha are actually going to choose to have an abortion based on an Internet poll.

Regardless of your position on abortion, all of these possibilities suggest these people should never, ever raise a kid.

http://gawker.com/56...kyline=true&s=i

Edited November 19, 2010 by Jenn!

[anya-D 8]

If this is true, these people shouldnt have a baby - they are sick.

why on earth would you try to get pregnant (this is the 3rd time?) and then want people to vote if they should have an abortion? as much as i'm sorry for the unbor child I would say abort it (him) so he doesnt have to live with these crazy idiots! how would a child think if they know my parents would consider abort me from the 'internet' vote!!! SICK!!!

[Tick Tock 3]

I wonder if their website generates revenue in any way.

Beyond this, in reading what Jenn! posted, I feel that their poll means nothing. The result can be vetoed and who aside from the couple truly knows whether or not they may have a decision in place that may end up being the same as the poll result?

[nab 74]

oh if i could have a vote, this is one time i would be behind forced sterilization.

[slim 1,525]

Did they post any other background information?

All I'm seeing right now is "should we have a baby or not?" and they're a 30-year-old couple that both work as techies. Is that all we get to base our choice on?

As for all this "they shouldn't have a kid because they're sick" stuff, why? Who is qualified and who isn't? Most of us take (or at least consider) relationship, marital, parental, etc., advice from friends, family and co-workers - many of whom are not even close to being "experts" - yet when they ask the advice of people they don't know they're labeled as "sick." Why is that?

[Jenn! 918]

No, they're sick because they're posting pictures of the sonograms and updating everyone on the fetus' progress, all the while asking whether they should abort it. Come on now, I think whatever your stance on abortion, that's pretty messed up.

But it seems pretty clear to me that these people are pro-lifers trying to make a point.

[slim 1,525]

No, they're sick because they're posting pictures of the sonograms and updating everyone on the fetus' progress, all the while asking whether they should abort it. Come on now, I think whatever your stance on abortion, that's pretty messed up.

But it seems pretty clear to me that these people are pro-lifers trying to make a point.

How is that any sicker than single moms posting pics of their kids on facebook? "Booboo lost his first toof."

[Jenn! 918]

How is that any sicker than single moms posting pics of their kids on facebook? "Booboo lost his first toof."

Huh?

[slim 1,525]

Huh?

You're saying it's sick that someone would post pics of sonograms and blog about a pregnancy only to abort the fetus.

I'm saying it's just as sick to raise a ghetto-@$$ kid who's going to end up in prison or some other waste of my tax dollars... yet everyone (especially the pro-lifers) tend to think that's perfectly OK.

Who's really sick?

[nab 74]

Did they post any other background information?

All I'm seeing right now is "should we have a baby or not?" and they're a 30-year-old couple that both work as techies. Is that all we get to base our choice on?

As for all this "they shouldn't have a kid because they're sick" stuff, why? Who is qualified and who isn't? Most of us take (or at least consider) relationship, marital, parental, etc., advice from friends, family and co-workers - many of whom are not even close to being "experts" - yet when they ask the advice of people they don't know they're labeled as "sick." Why is that?

when i saw the site originally it stated they were pregnant with a 17 week fetus. not should they get pregnant or not but should they kill it or not. now it shows sonograms etc

each time clicking on the link seems to go to a different website... does their site keep getting removed? IDK

Edited November 20, 2010 by nab

[trillium13 84]

If they don't know if they are ready to be parents, why are they getting pregnant?

There is definitely something missing from this story.