The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1775 |
Page 1 of 3 |
Author: | Dash [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:52 pm ] |
Post subject: | Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Any thoughts on this? Was it already covered? I liked the soft sell approach as I'm typically turned off by the more extreme tactics. [youtube]iwUehWBhfGA[/youtube] |
Author: | Müs [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Keep your politics out of my football Jesusboy. |
Author: | RangerDave [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
I have a lot of objections to the sponsoring organization - Focus on the Family - but I don't see anything whatsoever wrong with that ad. On the other hand, I think CBS is wrong to have rejected Left-wing ads while accepting that one. |
Author: | Müs [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:06 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Well, its the only way Tebow will ever be "in" the superbowl... But yeah, you should be listened to because you're the mom of a college football player? Sheesh. He hasn't even been drafted yet. |
Author: | Timmit [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
RangerDave wrote: On the other hand, I think CBS is wrong to have rejected Left-wing ads while accepting that one. They're a private corporation and can do whatever they want with their airtime that they want. If they decided that showing the commercial would cost them more revenue than showing it and suffering the "I'm offended/won't someone think of the children/gays are gross/whatever" demographic's backlash then they can hardly be called "wrong".It was a boring commercial, anyway, and there were more than enough of those already this superbowl The FOTF commercial was surprisingly tasteful (for them). I was expecting much worse... |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
It seems rather mild. Some one who didn't know any of the background on it wouldn't even know it's a pro-life commerical. And I can't comment on the "left wing" stuff a company "chose" (yay choice right?) not to air since I have no idea what that is. |
Author: | Slythe [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
There was nothing wrong with the commercial. It was mild and pleasant, but ultimately nondescript, forgotten, and wedged between countless snack and beer ads. The only real attention it got was from all the silly political bickering ahead of time and not from the actual ad. |
Author: | Khross [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
I am a huge critic of Focus on the Family. I am a huge critic of current abortion policy and rules. However, my opinion on the ad might surprise a lot of people ... Namely, I want to know why James Dobson didn't take the funds used to purchase that ad and direct them toward real charity? In a situation where tons of real good could have been done to help improve the image and quality of his organization, spending the money on a Superbowl Ad on a divisive issue was both a poor investment and a poor use of discretionary organization funds. |
Author: | Timmit [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Khross wrote: I am a huge critic of Focus on the Family. I am a huge critic of current abortion policy and rules. However, my opinion on the ad might surprise a lot of people ... Namely, I want to know why James Dobson didn't take the funds used to purchase that ad and direct them toward real charity? In a situation where tons of real good could have been done to help improve the image and quality of his organization, spending the money on a Superbowl Ad on a divisive issue was both a poor investment and a poor use of discretionary organization funds. They got a LOT of free publicity out of people freaking out about that commercial being carried but not the gay dating site one. As much as I don't like Focus on the Family, I'm not sure it wasn't a good use of money. |
Author: | Dash [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I'm not a Dobson fan either but he did get free mileage from that. I thought it was a good ad although I've skewed more towards pro-life since having a kid of my own. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Khross wrote: I am a huge critic of Focus on the Family. I am a huge critic of current abortion policy and rules. However, my opinion on the ad might surprise a lot of people ... Namely, I want to know why James Dobson didn't take the funds used to purchase that ad and direct them toward real charity? In a situation where tons of real good could have been done to help improve the image and quality of his organization, spending the money on a Superbowl Ad on a divisive issue was both a poor investment and a poor use of discretionary organization funds. Because he's really more interested in lecturing people than helping them. I don't know of any charity work done by James Dobson; he's entirely vested in Christian education, and there he panders only to the most extreme stereotype evangelicals. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
They also made them "tone down" the Dante's Inferno commercial which is ridiculous. |
Author: | Uncle Fester [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:24 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
In an interesting vein a similar caimpaign in Georgia. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,585 ... latestnews Quote: ATLANTA — The message on dozens of billboards across the city is provocative: Black children are an "endangered species." The eyebrow-raising ads featuring a young black child are an effort by the anti-abortion movement to use race to rally support within the black community. The reaction from black leaders has been mixed, but the "Too Many Aborted" campaign, which so far is unique to only Georgia, is drawing support from other anti-abortion groups across the country. "It's ingenious," said the Rev. Johnny Hunter, national director of the Life Education and Resource Network, a North Carolina-based anti-abortion group aimed at African-Americans that operates in 27 states. "This campaign is in your face, and nobody can ignore it." The billboards went up last week in Atlanta and urge black women to "get outraged." The effort is sponsored by Georgia Right to Life, which also is pushing legislation that aims to ban abortions based on race. Black women accounted for the majority of abortions in Georgia in 2006, even though blacks make up just a third of state population, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Nationally, black women were more than three times as likely to get an abortion in 2006 compared with white women, according to the CDC. "I think it's necessary," Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for Operation Rescue, said of the billboard campaign. "Abortion in the black community is at epidemic proportions. They're not really aware of what's actually going on. If it shocks people ... it should be shocking." Anti-abortion advocates say the procedure has always been linked to race. They claim Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger wanted to eradicate minorities by putting birth control clinics in their neighborhoods, a charge Planned Parenthood denies. "The language in the billboard is using messages of fear and shame to target women of color," said Leola Reis, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Georgia. "If we want to reduce the number of abortions and unintended pregnancies, we need to work as a community to make sure we get quality affordable health care services to as many women and men as possible." In 2008, Issues4Life, a California-based group working to end abortion in the black community, lobbied Congress to stop funding Planned Parenthood, calling black abortions "the Darfur of America." Pro-Life Action League Executive Director Eric Scheidler said a race-based strategy for anti-abortion activists has gotten a fresh zeal, especially in the wake of the historic election of the country's first black president, Barack Obama, who supports abortion rights. "He's really out of step with the rest of black America," Scheidler said. "That might be part of what may be shifting here and why a campaign like this is appropriate, to kind of wake up that disconnect." Abortion rights advocates are disturbed. Spelman College professor Beverly Guy-Sheftall called the strategy a gimmick. "To use racist arguments to try to bait black people to get them to be anti-abortion is just disgusting," said Guy-Sheftall, who teaches women's history and feminist thought at the historically black women's college. "These one-issue approaches that are not about saving the black family or black children, it's just a big distraction," she said. "Many black people don't know who Margaret Sanger is and could care less." I have often wondered how much of their own base the Democrats have helped abort? Blacks overwhelmingly vote democratic, so with so many aborted, they could have had a good voting block. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:59 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Uncle Fester: "..." Arathain: |
Author: | Slythe [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:42 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Uncle Fester: "..." Arathain: You racist Arathain...that hand is black! |
Author: | Taamar [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
I'd like to see a similar commercial with the rest of the women who made the same choice she did... except... most of them are dead (and their potential children too... all of them, not just the one that killed them). It's a survivor bias. Are they going to guarantee every outcome is that wonderful? How about a poignant commercial of a little girl saying "Mommy was browbeaten into carrying a dangerous pregnancy by people who simplified a complex medical decision into a moral issue. I miss her." |
Author: | Dash [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Taamar wrote: I'd like to see a similar commercial with the rest of the women who made the same choice she did... except... most of them are dead (and their potential children too... all of them, not just the one that killed them). It's a survivor bias. Are they going to guarantee every outcome is that wonderful? Do you know specifically what medical issue she had? I dont so I'm legitimately asking. Taamar wrote: How about a poignant commercial of a little girl saying "Mommy was browbeaten into carrying a dangerous pregnancy by people who simplified a complex medical decision into a moral issue. I miss her." That would be an odd one, not sure how I'd feel there. Obviously she is only there to miss her because her mom made that decision. In any case this ad certainly wasnt browbeating! |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Taamar wrote: I'd like to see a similar commercial with the rest of the women who made the same choice she did... except... most of them are dead (and their potential children too... all of them, not just the one that killed them). It's a survivor bias. Are they going to guarantee every outcome is that wonderful? How about a poignant commercial of a little girl saying "Mommy was browbeaten into carrying a dangerous pregnancy by people who simplified a complex medical decision into a moral issue. I miss her." I have no problems with the laws and principals of medical triage. However many abortions aren't done of medical triage. I don't know if any statistics exist but I'd imagine it's a majority. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
I stand corrected, apparently they do So even if I give the entire 11% of too young or immature to mean physically too young to safely deliver a baby. That means only about 20 percent of all abortions would follow the "Triage" Principal. |
Author: | Taamar [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:21 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Rorinthas wrote: I stand corrected, apparently they do So even if I give the entire 11% of too young or immature to mean physically too young to safely deliver a baby. That means only about 20 percent of all abortions would follow the "Triage" Principal. So who chooses what is 'too risky'? 1 in 10,000? 1 in 5? Certain death only? In my mind, the only person who has the right to decide is the woman herself, in full possession of all the fact and statistics (unskewed by any agenda), possibly with input from her family and clergy, if she wishes it. If I decide that a 1 in 1000 change of death is not something I wish to take that should be my right. And if Mrs. XYZ thinks that a 50/50 shot at orphaning her other kids is good enough for her, more power to her. |
Author: | Beryllin [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 6:47 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
Taamar wrote: I'd like to see a similar commercial with the rest of the women who made the same choice she did... except... most of them are dead (and their potential children too... all of them, not just the one that killed them). It's a survivor bias. Are they going to guarantee every outcome is that wonderful? How about a poignant commercial of a little girl saying "Mommy was browbeaten into carrying a dangerous pregnancy by people who simplified a complex medical decision into a moral issue. I miss her." Or maybe a commercial with the women who chose abortion and suffered depression and such for years afterward..... |
Author: | Dash [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:13 am ] |
Post subject: | |
I would certainly agree that the life of the mother is a very valid exception to any abortion restrictions. That's a very small percentage though. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:16 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Tim Tebow commercial (pro-life/choice stuff) |
I don't know. The specifics of "reasonable medical need" is something left to the professionals, yes on a case by case basis. However we need to remember that there is a second patient involved one who cannot speak for him/her self. However the statisics I cited show a large number of babies are being killed because women are seeing it as inconvenience. (I'm too poor/busy/selfish/burdened to have a baby). Those babies could have a reasonable shot a life in a loving home of the many peope in this country who wait to adopt. Fixing those cases is probably something best left to the war of hearts and minds (at least in this age and nation), and this comerical is a shot in that battle. |
Author: | TheRiov [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:21 am ] |
Post subject: | |
what about the fetus's that are nonviable but carrying them to term would result in sterility to the mother? ie the fetus will not survive the first year after birth but the mother would never be able to have another child? and Rorithas you hit the nail on the head. Those of us who support abortion rights usually dont see the 'second patient' -- potentiality for sapient life is NOT the same as sapient life. |
Author: | Dash [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:01 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Well yeah that's what this issue always comes down to, life or not and when does it become a life. The pro life people will tell you either from conception or "better to err on the side of life since we dont know for sure" and the pro-choice people will tell you either 'it's up to the woman' or never pin it down so as to leave all options open. I'm curious about the pro choice persons perspective though on this ad. Was it offensive? |
Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |