Super Bowl (tm) ad by Tim Tivo
 

You have probably heard about the pro-life ad by Tim Tivo and his mom. She was advised to terminate her pregnancy,but made the decision to carry it to term. As a result, Tim who may be the best college football player ever, was born.
Yet, to hear the outcry from some portions of the left, you'd think the ad was advocating outlawing all abortion.
Fairly typical. In my experience the Left favors freedon speech ONLY when they agree with it. All, other speech is to be limited, regulated, restricted or made illegal.

So what's your take?
Is even this speech to be allowed?

it goes to show that if your mom is not pro life, then you wont be......

to be, or not to be, THAT is the question.

logic is the one thing an opposing view has no comeback

this post will be ignored as no real argument can be made by a rational thinking person

but then again this is the OD

Complaint as I understand it is that CBS rejected pro-gay rights ads in the past but is accepting this ad. Seems like a reasonable complaint to me.

In the interviews that I have seen Tebow seems to think that the only possible response a child to could have to a mother who did what his mother did, is to think it was the right decision. I know people in exactly the same situation as Tim Tebow, who think their mother should have gotten an abortion.

So what then is the ad advocating? And what is its purpose if it is not against abortion?

I dont' think that is your EXPERIENCE, I think it is your spin.

Of course it is to be allowed. Quite a spendy way to get their message across though.

Can there be logic without grammar?

I know people in exactly the same situation as Tim Tebow, who think their mother should have gotten an abortion

if those people you know FRIENDS ???? who think that way tell their doctor they could get a nice soft room to live in -- jz

Sanity is not defined by self-interest and it's really bad form for religious people to be spending millions of dollars on ads implying that it is.

From what I have read the doctors recommended she have an abortion because they felt her life may be placed in jeopardy due to medication she had taken. The fact that Tim became a good football player is irrelevant. Besides, it's not as if he became a scientist, teacher, aid worker or someone who actually contributes to society. He is a athlete, big deal. But again it's irralevant. He could have just as easily become a burden on society. Too guilt a mother into having a child by way of saying you are killing the next Albert Einstein is irresponsible. The mother should be given all the options

No, it's ignored for several reasons, lack of a real argument is not one of them.

One additional point. If the religious right were to have it's way, Tebo's mother would not be in a position to be praised for carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term because she would not have a choice to do otherwise.

My take is you are confusing freedom of speech with disagreement. Someone who is disagreeing with you is not trying to limit your speech. I have not heard any "out cry on the left", the first I heard of this was this morning on CNN. I have heard exactly no one, and I read lots of lefty blogs, say anything at all like you claim, demanding that this individual's right to say what he wants to say be curtailed, I would like to see just one link to prove me wrong. Until then, this looks like some marketing department's blowing up some puffery to push some issue dejour to drum up the Superbowl. I find the pro-life position inherently fascist, I could care less what the little fascist has to say. I'm sure if men could get pregnant if a pregnancy meant an end to his football career, he'd be a screaming pro-choice fanantic.

Red Herring.
AFAIK, the ad does not promote taking away anyone's rights. It simply tells the other side of the story.

Hey, I'm glad they made that choice and it worked out great for them. But they don't want others to have that choice, they want to tell people what their choices are going to be. Like I said, fascist.

Not a red herring at all. From what I've seen about the content of the ad, Tebo's mother's is praised for her choice. Focus on the Family is sponsoring the ad. Are you telling me that Focus on the Family is in favor of abortion rights? That's nonsense. The ad is a volley in the culture wars.

Networks should be free to choose their advertisments and the consumers can vote with their wallets.

Yes, FOF is in favor of live births.

I have not seen the ad. Does it call for outlawing abortion, or does it just speak out on the other side?

AFAIK, the abortion issue has been decided; it is the law of the land. Do you think this ad will reverse that?

Are they also in favor of women having abortion rights? If not then I think you have your answer of what the purpose of the ad is.

The other side of what?? Do you think abortion rights advocates want women to be forced to get abortions? Are abortion rights advocates not in favor of individual women making decision to carry a fetus to term or not?

Don't know if this ad will reverse it or not. Focus on the Family would certainly be happy if it did and I believe is in favor of reversing it. One wing of the anti-abortion rights movement has a strategy of winning a culture war over a long period of time because they think the immediate prospects for overturning Roe v Wade are slim.
That's why I think it's important to point out that their praise of Ms. Tebow presumes the freedom to choose for or against an abortion.

this is the only guy who really sees it as it is / and should be

I support Tim Tivo's position. My own mother suggested that my wife abort our first son, he went on to fight for our country in the afghan war. My SON received many medals including two purple hearts for saving several people.

Supporting one woman's decision does not have to connote condemning another woman's.

Jolly, I agree with you on the rabidness of pro-lifers.

However, do you know the true definition of a fascist? I don't think you have the correct term here.

I would say that radical pro-lifers are more or less extremists who wish to impose their views on others. That's just simply a totalitarian ideal here.

I don't remember much from my logical fallacy days, but I believe this is a strawman argument. The fact that he became a major athlete is irrelevant to whether the abortion is moral or not.

And finally freedom of speech is irrelevant here. CBS isn't owned by the government and can talk air whatever they want. Quite frankly I don't care for football and I won't be watching the super bowl. It is however in CBS's best interest to appear to be a neutral party.

Here's an option she's not being given - KILL YOURSELF.

That's an option, right?

Instead of going through life wondering if you made the right or wrong decesion, just pull the trigger on yourself.

Therefore, all self-doubt is removed.

NEXT! :D

Brings to mind the movie with Jimmy Stewart, "A Wonderful Life" - and my congratulations to your son, and your family for having him.

I'm sure those he saved are thanking your family every night. ;)

Did I say otherwise?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

CBS turns down gay s'bowl add
 

It had to happen.
http://www.newser.com/story/79612/cbs-kos-gay-super-bowl-ad.html

Super Bowl, really?

Isn't football season over yet?

Where did I say what you said did? :rolleyes:


And now, the story takes the inevitable icky turn . . .

CA Attorney Calling Tebow's Mom A Fibber

The pro-choice heroine and lawyer is busy trying to paint Pam Tebow a liar, saying because the Philippines outlaws abortion, she finds it hard to believe that doctors would recommend the procedure.

focus on the family.

The group supports the teaching of "traditional family values". It advocates school sponsored prayer and supports corporal punishment.[7] It strongly opposes abortion, so-called militant feminism, homosexuality, pornography, and pre-marital and extramarital sexual activity. Focus on the Family also embraces and reflects the wider political agenda of its audience, for instance promoting a religiously-centered conception of American identity and the support of Israel.

Thank you for your thoughts and Patriotism. :D

Is all that somehow relevant to the discussion about whether or not the ad should be aired?
Does free speech apply only to groups whose actions and views with whom you agree?

Commercial broadcasting is the exact opposite of "free speech." Just ask Howard Stern. :D

I don't think it is relevent.

As you know, "free speech" only applies to restrictions imposed by the government.

Of course, but it is revelatory to see how people would restrict speech, if only they had the power.

Who in this thread has stated anything revelatory about restricting speech?

uh, you seem to want to restrict my right to post facts about "focus on the family"?

why?

they are involved with this ad, no? or did i miss something?

Hey, no cutting in line, wait your turn! I'm still owed a response of how I supposedly misquoted him. ;)

obviously, we didn't receive enough corporal punishment, nor did we pray enough while in school.

Prayer was common during math exams . . . then I found out from Jim Morrison that "you cannot petition the lord with prayer." :D

to be honest (and factual) the ad is anti-abortion. (pro-life is a "spin" term developed by the "anti abortion" crowd to make their desire for control of women seem more palatable. )

Both "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are examples of terms labeled as political framing: they are terms which purposely try to define their philosophies in the best possible light, while by definition attempting to describe their opposition in the worst possible light. "Pro-choice" implies that the alternative viewpoint is "anti-choice", while "pro-life" implies the alternative viewpoint is "pro-death" or "anti-life"[41]. Similarly each side's use of the term "rights" ("reproductive rights", "right to life of the unborn") implies a validity in their stance, given that the presumption in language is that rights are inherently a good thing and so implies an invalidity in the viewpoint of their opponents.
The Associated Press encourages journalists to use the terms "abortion rights" and "anti-abortion".[4

by the way, i am merely freely expressing the facts of the matter. surely no real american would object to that?

and i thought it was about she dident have Him aborted and he turned out to be a good KID who would have guessed

Kill them all let god sort them out i guess dont apply or does it I am confused -- jz

It would be nice to know the particulars of Ms. Tebo's pre-natal medical difficulties. Was it a case of pre-eclampsia or something more serious. I've heard a lot of 'testimonies' in my day that were exaggerated.

She was considering aborting God?

Some FL football fans might not disagree with the comparison.

No objection here. You have spoken well, and freely.

THAT is one of the problems with "testimonies". Instead of telling simply what God has done, some people put the spotlight on What God did for ME.

Sometimes its almost like a private conversation, here in OD, and other times its more like everyone talking at once. I took your comment personally, when you evidently meant it as part of the genertal discussion.