I don't have time to post my thought on this, but they are what you might expect from me. I guess the question is should this be attacked or even aired?

pro-life people have a right to voice their opinions; pro-choice people have a right to articulate their disagreement.

I have nothing against Tebow doing this. He has a legitimate reason for being pro-life; even if he didn't, that's not for anyone to criticize. Likewise, pro-choice people have a right to disagree. There's going to be people who support what Tebow's doing, and there's going to be people who don't. No one is right or wrong. It's just how it is.

CBS can show whatever ads they want; I almost wish they would run this one back-to-back with an ad about someone who had a life-saving abortion and went on to do something important, or something like that. Presenting one side as clearly superior is pretty much wrong, but it's within their right to do. I think it's a tad hypocritical in light of the UCC thing but what can you do.

My one objection is that I don't want to see Tebow. EVER. Then again, when he comes on TV I'll probably just go grab a drink/food anyway.

Shouldn't be aired, political ads have no place in the superbowl, all I want to see are advertising agencies given free reign to do funny things.

What's funnier than abortion?

What I don't understand is why there was no outrage when a political ad ran during last year's super bowl.

Ads don't have a place in the superbowl. Football has a place in the superbowl.

But ads are the best part of the superbowl.

No. They are a part of the experience, but the game is the best part.

Agree to disagree?

On this part? OK.

As far as I know, anybody has the right to buy a TV ad regardless of what programming the ad interrupts. However, the article also says

so it seems like there might be reasonable grounds to object.

I see why they object, but what I don't see is why lifing the restrictions is a bad thing. I highy doubt these groups would be so upset is a pro-feminist agenda commercial was aired first after these restrictions where lifted.

Well, actually, the article says that CBS had previously refused to run an ad highlighting a church's acceptance of gays...so one could arguably contend that CBS is applying a double standard.

This is kind of exactly like that godawful old story about Mozart's handicapped siblings.

I really smurfing hate that anecdote.

I've never had to hear that, though I've had to hear some stupid "true" stories in my time.

It varies--Mozart, Beethoven, etc--but the gist is, [Insert World-Renowned Genius] had five older siblings, all of whom were born severely handicapped. Had abortion been legal in those days, [World-Renowned Genius]'s mother would've aborted them, and we subsequently would have never had any of the awesome, super-cool, amazing, wonderful smurf they gave the world.

Yeah.

But you COULD get abortions back then.....

I know, Jonesy. I know. We all know. And that's why we hate the story.

:'( I hate people.....

But if the standard has been changed, someone has to be the first to take advantage of it. And it's not ike this is the first add to do this. The article also says that adds for and against government healthcare have been running for the ast few months and those would not have been allowed to air under the old rules. If this was a rule changing move by CBS, I might be more inclined to see it from their point of view, but the fact is that it is not.

It's pretty retarded (who will change their opinion on abortion because of a TV ad?), but hey, Christian organizations can spend their money as they please, I guess. I woulda gone for a soup kitchen or something, but whatever.

Indeed, I have heard that story about Beethoven. In fact, a simple look at Wikipedia reveals that Beethoven was in fact the second child in his family (assuming Wikipedia is correct, of course). I'd never thought to check its accuracy before. Of course, that kind of argument against abortion is logically absurd anyway. If I accidentally hit my crotch on something tomorrow, I might prevent myself from fathering a child who would cure cancer!


This is pretty much how I see it. No problem with the ad, it's just a waste of money.

I don't believe that it is intended to change your opinion on wether or not abortion is moral. It is more to encourage women to decide to keep their child.

again, if you're gonna make a HUGE life decision like that based on "omg tim tebow says its cool" then something's wrong with you.

Something's wrong with a lot of Americans

"My child will probably end up be a crack-dealing gang banger, but there's that negligible chance that he might be a pretty good quarterback!!!"

is there a difference between the two?

Quarterbacks can afford more refined cocaine, but beyond that, not really.

CBS can do whatever they want. If it's a double standard, it's a double standard. Who cares.

If Tebow cries in the ad, there will be more jokes about him.

If they show fetuses, I'mma puke.

I'm sure it can't be any worse than those racist salesgenie ads a few years back that depicted Chinese people as pandas and Indians as people with a dozen children in their families.

The chinese would be a lot cooler if they were all pandas. Plus, if they were, pandas wouldn't be endangered anymore

I can get on board with Chinese being superpandas. I would even bow down to my new bamboo-eating overlords with pleasure.

...interesting

Wow... Tim Tebow's mom is to abortion as Harriet Beecher Stowe was to slavery? Innnnnnnnnnteresting conclusion.

I'm sorry, but that article was poorly written and mostly devoid of logic. While it's probably true that putting a human face on abortion will make some people reconsider it, jumping from that to comparing abortion to the Holocaust and slavery is just pretty ridiculous. I can't imagine many people who weren't already opposed to abortion reading that and coming to any conclusion other than that the author is extremely biased.

There we have to disagree on that part. For those of us who see abortion as the taking of human life, that's exactly what it is. Though I will agree the article was no the best, lambasting widespread beliefs that are expressed in it makes you look even more biased and condescending.

First of all, I was only criticizing the article for its lack of cohesion and the fact that it established no logical connection between its earlier claims and slavery and the Holocaust. But you decided to take offense because you felt like your incredibly stupid beliefs are under attack. They weren't before. But now you crossed a line. So now, those beliefs are under attack. Yes, everyone is entitled to their own opinions: you're entitled to the opinion that abortion is analogous to the Holocaust, and I'm entitled to the opinion that that is a remarkably stupid opinion.

Let's see here.

Holocaust: Organized and methodical execution of specific types of people, specifically and primarily people of a certain religion. Involved torture, starvation, loss of homes, property, and dignity. Was perpetrated partly for political gain, partly for economic gain, and partly out of pure malice.

Abortion: Individual decision to terminate a single pregnancy, primarily based on a mother's decision that said pregnancy would be harmful to her. Doesn't involve any kind of large-scale organization, and if pain is involved, it is brief and probably pales in comparison to the suffering that child would have undergone if born into a home in which it is unwanted. Little or no effort has gone into its existence or establishment of its life. Even if you believe it is a human, it has not been tortured (or, if you believe the claims of some people, it was tortured briefly before being killed), and its death affects no others.

In short, you are an ignorant piece of smurf. I didn't know what "cousins" were until I was at least 10, because of the Holocaust. I literally have no family. You want to say that a family is missing a person because of abortion? Well, my family isn't missing a person. My family is smurfing missing. If my great-grandparents hadn't left Poland basically exactly when they did, my grandpa would be dead. He probably would have died as a child, starving and in pain.

These were real human beings who actually mattered in the world. These were people who had jobs and families and people who relied on them. It wasn't a fetus that could eventually become a person. It was a person. Millions of people. They weren't killed because they posed a health risk to the person who would have to carry them in the womb for nine months, or because that person who would have to go through the ordeal of pregnancy couldn't financially support them, or because that person wasn't ready for a child. They were killed for being born into a Jewish family. That's it. There was no logical reason. There was no justification. There was no excuse.

Gentlemen, might I suggest that we tone things down a bit?

Someone needs to get mad at him or he'll think it's okay to say the things he does. It's not.

.
Dude. Chill. Th Holocaust was one of he most terrible thing that ever happened on the face of the earth. I take nothing from that. I meant to offense to you and you know that. I know how hotbutton this is for you and Jewish people in all the generations since the 1940s but did not realize that what I said would set you off like that. You know that I do not go out to make attacks based on religion, race, sexual orientation, or political ideals. I will not change my views to accommodate them. Anytime I put my foot in my mouth like I obviously did, all you have to do is point out how and why I offended you and in all likelihood I will realized my horrible mistake and apologize. Calling me is OK in my book, though I am a litlle touchy about being called an ignorant mothersmurfer. Allow me the chance to clarify my views below.

What scares me about abortion is that there are more lives that will not be lived than there taken in the Holocaust and with no ideological reason that has misled people like Hitler's did. A crazed ideology can be stopped. And if you believe like me, American abortions may have a larger long-term affect on America with the loss of ideas and manpower.

Look, the point of what I'm saying is this: Comparing your neoconservative Christian cause of choice to the Holocaust doesn't strengthen the impression of the horror of abortion. It trivializes perhaps the greatest tragedy in human history. The ONE AND ONLY positive aspect of the Holocaust is its memory. As long as we remember it, we can stop it from happening again. The horror of the Holocaust cannot be compared to anything else. Period.

Badger, you often post about how you're offended at someone else's comments, in light of your own heritage and beliefs. Well, the comparison you made is about as offensive as it can get, as far as I'm concerned. You insulted me, my family, and my cultural heritage.

Let's put it this way: If I offered to take all of your extended family, and put them in Auschwitz; if I offered to starve them, dehumanize them, rob them, experiment on them, divide them from each other, and eventually murder them, and, in exchange, offered to prevent two abortions for each family member taken, how would you respond? Would you think "Oh, great, a two-for-one deal!"? Or would you react in abject horror, disgust, and take the utmost offense at the suggestion? If that doesn't illustrate the absolutely appalling nature of your comparison for you, I don't know what will.

I understand what you're saying about abortion, but just say that. That's a valid claim that can be argued. The problem is that there's far too little of that in politics today, and far too much of fear-mongering, misleading stories, and comparisons like the ones you made. I'm not entirely sure where I stand on abortion, honestly. But when I see something like that article, I know where I don't stand: with people who think like that.

Holy smokes, dudes... Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the line with the current thread direction. We're talking about the Tebow ad, not whether or not abortion is right, wrong, or a reason to invoke Godwin's Law.

The Holocaust involved state-run murders of people who were born, forced euthanasia of the weak and old, AND abortions for non-Aryans. So, clearly, allowing elective abortions is not on the same level as the Holocaust, as it does not involve the state-run murder aspect or the forced euthanasia. It would be better to not compare the abortion issue to any state-run program of mass murder. In the US, abortions are elective procedures. Like it or not, there is no coercion involved. This isn't even on the level of China's "one child" policy, which contains aspects offensive to both pro-life and abortion rights advocates.

If you want to compare the Holocaust to another event, start another thread and you'd better only compare it to some other episode of state-run mass murder program, such as the Holomodor, the Armenian Holocaust, the Cambodian Holocaust, the Cultural Revolution, the Stalinist Purges, the Guomindang Purges, the Indian Wars, the wars in the former Yugoslavia, the Croatian Holocaust (1941-1945), and the like.

That's an admin rule, and I'm sticking with it. This thread is for the Tebow ad and is more a first amendment question (or a question of taste) than it is some other issue.

I just invisibled a post continuing along the lines of what I said NOT to do.

Hey, it wasn't me this time!

dammit, good thing i read past zzzptm's post before i went apeshit.