Senior of college, in the midst of The Ex on our rollercoaster, my pal tried to set me up with her pal. It wasn’t meant to be despite the fact that I fell hard. Real hard. He was a Florida boy and the distance put a wrench in what could have been but more so the fact that we were both at immensely different stages in life made it even more difficult. (then i met hubs. The rest? History). He was a Florida Gators fan. Like super hard core. Tim Tebow’s name often got dropped in the terms of worship, though I never got the hype. I’m kind of starting to get it after reading about him a little more….
I don’t have a favorite football team, I really don’t give a flying eff about football quite frankly (though I have been known to cry at hockey games. On many occasions. No comments from the BU fans in the crowd. ). I couldn’t help but follow the controversy that’s going on around the Tim Tebow ad that’s going to be aired during the superbowl.
A chaste athlete? That won the Heisman trophy?! Seriously?! The athletes I’ve met were hardly faithful let alone chaste. I’ve been hearing a lot that the ad shouldn’t be aired because CBS rejected a gay advertising service ad.
….
Firstly…one has nothing to do with the other.
I will clarify, that I am pro-choice. Not vehemently. Conservatively pro-choice for drastically personal reasons (I’d be an aunt of a five year old. We’ll leave it at that.) I know that sounds like an oxymoron but it’s really not. I think every woman has the right to choose what to do with her body but I also believe in personal responsibility and abortion used as a form of birth control is immensely irresponsible. Yet the super-feminazis out there think that that’s okay. Then again, they also believe that anyone who doesn’t think that that’s okay is W-R-O-N-G.
But I really liked this, fromt the WaPo:
Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn’t be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn’t.
There’s not enough space in the sports pages for the serious weighing of values that constitutes this debate, but surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the “need” for abortions wasn’t so great. Which is precisely why NOW is so wrong to take aim at Tebow’s ad.
I pride myself on my open mindedness. I pride myself on always listening to both sides of any argument, having friends who believe very different things from me – both more liberal and more conservative. But I’m not gonna lie, Sally Jenkins is right. N.O.W. is really not helping their image at all by protesting this. Not that they give a damn really, their image is apparently dependent on stifling the other side.
While I remain pro-choice through and through, that in no way means I necessarily condone the actions of the pro-choice movement regarding this issue. However, at the same time, I do also believe that the pro-life movement makes incredibly unacceptable accusations and arguments. It’s kind of sad that neither side will listen to the other and work towards a common cause – lowering the number of abortions and providing comprehensive sex education for all students (especially students in high school).
Now, I don’t think I need to tell y’all to speak your minds but my God please be respectful. I know many people get incredibly heated up over this issue and I certainly want to hear everyone’s thoughts but I will not tolerate any personal attacks or disrespectful comments. My point with this is that both sides of the debate need to be willing to LISTEN and engage each other (wishful thinking).
Work with me, what are your thoughts?
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
I think you summed that up really well! Its such a controversial issue, but I think everyone is entitled to their own preferences. I also think that NOW shouldn’t have gotten in the middle of the Tebow situation. It seems to take away some of their respectability, unfortunately.
I saw that article yesterday, and I smirked at the NOW pitching their fits over all this nonsense. I don’t think they get all pissy over all the GoDaddy.com ads, do they? I reaaally struggle with the Pro-Life/Pro-Choice debate for so many reasons that I won’t get into here, but I’m tired of all the ganging up on the Tebows. It’s 30 seconds where there’s talk of celebrating life. Get over it, people.
I dunno. I like the ad. I like the message. It’s a beautiful story, much like Sarah Palin’s. But it drives me crazy because they then forget that they had a CHOICE.
It’s conflicting, especially since… well, you know where I work.
But I think that much ado is being made over something where the more ado that is made helps both sides in it. I’mjustsayin.
I couldn’t agree with you more. I’m pro-life; I believe that abortion is murder. But I am not so close-minded in my opinion that I believe shoving pictures of dead babies in pregnant mothers’ faces is going to change anything. You are right: in order to decrease the number of unneeded abortions, we need to listen. We need to not accuse those who we assume to understand.
I think the issue people are having is that CBS, as a matter of practice, does not air commercials that are controversial or advocacy ads. That’s why everyone is so up in arms. Personally, I am pro-choice, but I also worked in advertising and believe in free speech. It’s not the ad itself that is the problem, it’s that CBS is all of a sudden igorning it’s own rule.
At first, I was all gung-ho about it (I am who I am, man)
. Then Mr.Ford brought up a good point–well did NOW try to do a counter ad? The answer was no (and stopped me in my tracks). This is where the problem rests: when CBS decides to air an “advocacy” ad–they need to be open to all advocates. Like how they rejected ManCrunch (a gay dating site) from advertising — the DOUBLE STANDARD *is* very much a problem. You can’t pick and choose the first amendment,dude.
Here’s the ad, btw:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/28/mancrunch-superbowl-ad-ga_n_440773.html
And for those of you saying it’s inappropriate to see two men kissing, ie “it’s not family friendly,” well I would counter that abortion–choice or anti, is *not* family friendly, either.
Sally Jenkins is one of my favorite writers.
I don’t agree with abortion, but I think the “pro-life” (I put that in quotation marks because I don’t think “pro-choice” is “anti-life”) goes about it all wrong. It should be about getting rid of the stigmas that lead women to abortion, like poverty and shame. Making abortions illegal won’t make them go away. It just means women will have unsafe, unregulated procedures.
That said, I don’t really care whether CBS runs the ad or not, but it does seem like there’s a double standard at play.
I will, though, respectfully disagree with Anamarie on one point . CBS CAN pick and choose what they want to air as advertisements. It’s not really a First Amendment issue because it’s a commercial venture not the government we’re talking about.
Please don’t take that the wrong way. I’m one of the biggest First Amendment advocates out there. I think CBS should consider the ManCrunch ad, but they don’t have to.
I am not a member of NOW, nor have I been on their site recently, but I don’t think that anyone believes that abortions should be used as birth control.
Anyway, I think that:
#1 CBS should either stick to their “no advocacy ads allowed policy” or allow other advocacy ads (they did admit that the bad economy was a reason for allowing the ad- you are just making MORE money by allowing other advocacy ads)
#2 that Focus on the Family is probably wasting their money because most people are drunk when they watch the Superbowl
#3 According to Gloria Allred, Mrs. Tebow didn’t have a choice in whether she had an abortion or not. Abortion has been illegal in Malaysia since the 1930s and with stiff penalties, doctors there would not have suggested the procedure. So the ad is misleading in that she didn’t choose life, she simply didn’t have a choice. However, the ad won’t discuss that part.
Sorry, the Tebows lived in the Phillipines at the time.
Perhap NOW is countering the ad because it doesn’t have the million dollar fee it takes to run an ad during the Superbowl? It seems to me you are stifling NOW’s decision to speak out against Tebow, not NOW stifling Tebow. I don’t know the answer to the problem, but I do know FOR SURE that NOW’s message is not PRO abortion– no one is pro abortion. NOW is pro-CHOICE– you have the right to choose to carry to term, and another woman should have the right to choose abort if that is what is best in her situation.
I don’t believe i ever said NOW was pro-abortion. I understand that no one is. However, the pro-choice movement itself often comes of as angry and stifling anyone who doesn’t agree with them – that being said, so does the “pro-life” side.
Unfortunately, the kicker in this whole debate is that CBS, as a private entity, has the right to pick and choose their advertising whether we like it or not. It doesn’t seem to me that NOW even TRIED to run an ad countering the Tebow ad – the Tebow, as many people fail to acknowledge “celebrates family and life” never once does it say abortion. What is there to be so upset about if they’re not saying ABORTIONS ARE WRONG? It seems to me that if NOW could get if their high horse, they’d realize this ad might just go toward a greater goal – reducing pregnancies, reducing abortions and encouraging responsibility/abstinence which is something BOTH sides should be able to rally around.