The Tebow ad you didn’t see

By David Waters Did you see the pro-life Super Bowl ad featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother … Continued

By David Waters

Did you see the pro-life Super Bowl ad featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother Pam? Were you amused? Annoyed? Confused? If you blinked you probably missed the 30-second spot that ran after the Saints very first three-and-out possession in the first quarter.

You didn’t see the alternative version of the ad that Focus on the Family chose not to run. Ken Tucker, TV critic for Entertainment Weekly, wonders why FF chose the ad that was lighter, less effective and somewhat distracting (though funnier — Tebow tackles his mother).

“Tim tackles Mom; well, not hilarious, but kind of sweet . . . and even more distracting from whatever serious message Focus on the Family may want to convey,” Tucker wrote. “I think what we’re seeing here is FF backing away from a more aggressive statement in order to get its spots on CBS’ air. The result is classic bad advertising: The personalities on display distract from the message this deeply conservative organization wants to spread.”

———–

UPDATE: According to a Barna Group survey, “While millions of Americans watched the commercial, many viewers expressed confusion regarding the commercial’s meaning and sponsor. In fact, when asked to describe what they thought the main message to be, one-fifth of viewers (20%) were not able to venture a guess about the ad’s main message. A minority of ad viewers described it as anti-abortion (38%) although the commercial never used that term or discussed that procedure. Another 19% thought it was about being pro-family or expressing that family is important.”

In the ad that didn’t run, Tim doesn’t tackle his mom. But neither ad tackles the issue of abortion head-on. Neither add includes the words abortion or pro-life. Both ads feature a mother talking about how grateful she is for her son, and vice versa. That’s exactly what Focus on the Family President Jim Daly said the ad would show.

“There’s nothing political about the ad,” Daly wrote for On Faith last week. “Nothing shocking or divisive. Nothing “anti” anything. It’s just an inspiring story from the Tebows – as much as can be fit into 30 seconds, anyway – about celebrating family and celebrating life.”

Watch the two ads. Which is more effective as a pro-life message? Which did you like best?

Both Tebow ads direct viewers to the Focus on the Family Web site to hear more about the family’s story. On the site, Daly interviews Pam and her husband Bob Tebow about “the platform God has given” Tim.

“We have reminded (Tim) countless times that God has a special plan for him. He spared him in the womb, He spared him since,” Pam says.

“I prayed for a preacher but God gave me a quarterback. .. but he is preaching,” Bob says.

His parents are preaching more.

Meanwhile, you also can watch a counter ad produced by Planned Parenthood, featuring Olympic gold medalist Al Joyner and former NFL football player Sean James promoting what they call “respect for women’s choices.”

In the one-minute ad, James says that he “respects and honors Mrs. Tebow’s decision” but every woman’s decision must be “valued … trusted and respected.”

Joyner says, “My daughter will always be my little girl. But I am proud everyday as I watch her grow up to be her own person, a smart, confident young woman. I trust her to take care of herself. We celebrate families by supporting our mothers, by supporting our daughters. By trusting women,” Joyner concluded.

Watch this ad. More or less effective than the Tebow ads?

About

  • notation

    Rohit: A constitutional right cannot be created just by Justice Blackmun and his allies simply SAYING that it exists.

  • abu_ibrahim

    Planned Prenthood ad, listen to this ad, here is what Sean James says: «We’re working toward the day when every woman will be valued.»O Sean, may that day come, but it is not yet here. Unwanted women, they are not valued. India, widow-burning, suttee, British stopped widow-burning, now British are gone, India has aughter-in-law-burning, husband’s family does not like husband’s bride, dowry not big enough, they burn daughter-in-law, British are not there to stop it. Jordan, Occupied West Bank, «honor killing», young woman flirts, goes out with men, has sex with men, her family, they no longer want her, she is unwanted, they say she is a «disgrace» to family «honor», her own father, her own brothers, they murder her because she is unwanted. China, one-child limit per family, family has a daughter, then a second daughter, second daughter is unwanted, she is a harmless baby but she is unwanted, they kill her because they want a son and she is unwanted. India, modern technology, sonograph, family sees they will have another daughter if they do nothing about it, they «terminate» new daughter while she is still a fetus, because she is unwanted.The message from Mr. James should be, a human, a woman, a child, a fetus — they must be valued simply because they are human, their value does not depend on whether they are wanted or unwanted, they must be valued even if they are unwanted. This message, which organization’s message is closest to this message? Is it «Planned Parenthood», whose slogan is, «every child a wanted child» — and for the unwanted child, an elective abortion? How would they like India, Jordan, China, «every woman a wanted woman» — and the unwanted women they do away with»? Is not Sean James’s message closer to «Focus on the Family’s» message?

  • dnickol

    What I find interesting is that in the recorded interview on the Focus on the Family web site, the story Pam Tebow tells is that she was told by the first doctor that she needed an “abortion,” but that she was not carrying a baby but rather a mass of fetal cells — that is, a tumor. No matter how strongly one believes in a fetus’s right to life, I can’t believe those on the pro-life side consider it wrong to “abort” a tumor. Strangely, having been told she has a tumor in her womb, she does not return to the first doctor at all and does not consult other doctors until she goes to Manila seven months later. I can understand why many with a strong religious faith would refuse medical advice to have an abortion of a developing baby. But simply to ignore the advice of a doctor who says your fetus is actually a tumor, and not to see another doctor for seven months, makes absolutely no sense to me.

  • cpameetingbook

    The reviewer here did not see the real,real secret video. It shows Tebow tackling an abortion doctor. And Tebow is tackling mad!

  • cassie123

    Notation:You write: “If one had been aborted, one wouldn’t have the capacity to know it. If you’d been aborted, no one would miss you. Millions of fertilized eggs are expelled daily, dear. Are you going to mourn over them? They’re no more capable of conscious thought than a fetus is, and their loss doesn’t have the slightest effect on anyone.”First, I think your statement actually helps the pro-life arguement. That an egg is fertilized and survives on to become a human being is special. Sure, millions of fertilized eggs are expelled, but that point should make the ones that do become a human embryo that much more special and amazing. If embryos are nothing more than a clump of cells, why do you think scientist scramble for stem cells (remember that huge stem cell debate a few years back)? The most important type of stem cells are found in embryos (and yes some are found in the adult body but these are small amounts and are generally not regarded as scientifically significant as embryotic stem cells).Also, the arguement that if you were aborted you wouldn’t be in existance to complain is somewhat of a farce. Well, of course you wouldn’t be in a capacity to complain. The point is that no one knows the true capacity for an individual. The point is that I will not presume that anyone’s life is more important than someone elses just because of their background, circumstances, looks, mental capacity, or convience of their mother. Having sex is a choice. Perhaps the choice regarding life should be made earlier than the creation of a living embryo in a womb.

  • qoph

    Scott Peterson killed wife Laci and unborn child Conner. He was convicted of two counts of murder. SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN.

  • jonstephens

    I thought the Letterman ad with Orah and Jay Leno was pretty good. (How come comedians behave so much better than religious folk? Can’t we all just get along?)

  • insider9909

    The good news is that this is the last time we will see Tebow at an NFL event (unless, of course, he buys a ticket).

  • Try2Ketchup

    Folks, we need bonehead football players to tell us how to live. ;-)

  • jpenergy

    ‘ll bet that every person who is commenting, and every person who watched the super bowl and every person who was at the super bowl….is quite happy that their mother CHOSE to have them instead of CHOOSING to have them killed before they where born. Choose Life, its worth living.Posted by: US-conscience | February 8, 2010 12:47 PM Well I might add that ‘ll bet that every person who is commenting, and every person who watched the super bowl and every person who was at the super bowl…is questioning your mothers decision about now…oh master of the obvious

  • jpenergy

    I watched the game, saw or took notice of NO ads. I have long known that ads are for worthless products,(if it was really great and useful there would be no need for the ad.)All choices have a cost that is life. I do not feel qualified to decide for others what choice they should make, nor would I like others to decide my choices. everyone must live with the choices they make that is the cost. The relationship that others have with god or how they decide is not to be judged by you it is between them and their god.” judge not lest ye be judged” ring any bell?

  • ltorrence

    I saw the one where Tim tackles his Mom. I think there was much-ado-about-nothing.Don’t know why some people were upset. I believe in womens choice. Had she not had Tim I would never had the opportunity to watch him play quarter back.

  • PhilChenier

    Ah, we live in the United States of the Offended. People just love to gripe. And boy it’s oh so easy on the internet. Hide behind the keyboard. If you don’t like it, don’t abide by it. Someone may have been inspired by it. And that’s a good thing. Put a helmet on!

  • shewholives

    Tebow thrashing his mother seemed bizarrely Oedepusian to me. At least it wasn’t condescending and preachy like Dobson.

  • shewholives

    James Dobson must have some really great skeletons in his closet. What do you think that guy is hiding? He’s a closet gay? Drug addict? Gets a little somthin, somthin on the side?

  • aeaustin

    Religious politics during the Super Bowl sucks!!!!!

  • JohninMpls

    In addition to the extra Tebow videos, the Focus on the Family website offers lots of great information on “Pro-Gay Revisionist Theology,” as well as counseling options for those with “Unwanted Same-Sex attractions.”That’s the problem with the ad. The product is crap. Budweiser can make one hilarious commercial, but their beer is still awful. It doesn’t matter how “effective” the Tebow ad is still selling you an anti-choice, homophobic organization.

  • JustConcerned

    There is one thing I certainly hope everyone agrees with: We should all be working to reduce the number of abortions. Unless someone wants to argue that abortion is the best method of birth control.

  • momof20yo

    If Planned Parenthood respected my choices, they’d shut up and go out of business!!!!

  • PhilChenier

    Still more censorship. Great.

  • notation

    cassie 123: Also, the arguement that if you were aborted you wouldn’t be in existance to complain is somewhat of a farceWhen you actually have an education, you can lecture me about what rights I have and how they’re inferior to those of a fetus.

  • notation

    Scott Peterson killed wife Laci and unborn child Conner. He was convicted of two counts of murder. SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN.POSTED BY: QOPH

  • notation

    If Planned Parenthood respected my choices, they’d shut up and go out of business!!!!POSTED BY: MOMOF20YO Or do they just peskily insist on respecting those rights when you don’t think others should have them?

  • notation

    “…every woman’s decision must be “valued … trusted and respected.”Really? The crack addict impregnated while trading sex for drugs? The alcoholic who has pickled her fetus in utero? The woman who’s had five abortions in three years?These women deserve access to abortion, but not for the reasons given in the Planned Parenthood spot. The PP ad is no more honest than that of FotF.POSTED BY: WYLIED

  • notation

    And just how common are those examples? Do you think the majority of women who seek to terminate a pregnancy are prostitutes and drug addicts? Of course you do. If a woman isn’t pure as the driven snow and doesn’t live up to your “standards”, she must be a ‘ho’ or a druggie and therefore, completely without any rights whatsoever.

  • Penny6444

    The issue is that with a smart liberal president and some older Supreme Court justices who are close to retirement, abortion will remain legal in this country in the future, thank God. Then Mrs Tebow and all the rest of the woman in this country will be able to make their own decisions which is the way it should be.

  • arancia12

    I’m not getting it. What exactly is “sweet” about a man tackling the woman who risked her life to give him life? I’m not feelin’ it.To me, it speaks to what FotF feels about women. They are walking wombs and make pretty good practice dummies too.

  • arancia12

    I disagree with those who think there should be no reproductive rights. But I disagree even more with those who think that “right to choose” comes without responsibility because it is a “constitutional right.” It is not a constitutional right – constitutional rights were enacted when the constitution was written, and added to by constitutional amendments which THE NATION APPROVED. Then praytell, what rights do I have, exactly? By your standard you don’t have a right to surgery, to food, to shelter. You don’t have a right to walk on a sidewalk, to buy clothes, to protect your child. You don’t have a right to have a child. You’re comments were specious.

  • notation

    Umm, my post clearly stated, “These women deserve access to abortion,” and implied that this access is _not_ predicated on their deserving our trust or respect.Sorry if the point is too subtle for you. But you’re probably used to that.POSTED BY: WYLIE

  • arancia12

    Scott Peterson killed wife Laci and unborn child Conner. He was convicted of two counts of murder. SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN.Oh brother. Was the fetus part of Scott Peterson’s body? No. Her body, her choice. And you may remember that many people were very upset over the law that was enacted to prosecute Scott Peterson.The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law which recognizes a “child in utero” as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines “child in utero” as “a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb”.[2]The law is codified in two sections of the United States Code: Title 18, Chapter 1 (Crimes), §1841 (18 USC 1841) and Title 10, Chapter 22 (Uniform Code of Military Justice) §919a (Article 119a).The law applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on Federal properties, against certain Federal officials and employees, and by members of the military. In addition, it covers certain crimes that are defined by statute as federal offenses wherever they occur, no matter who commits them, such as certain crimes of terrorism.Because of principles of federalism embodied in the United States Constitution, Federal criminal law does not apply to crimes prosecuted by the individual states. However, 34 states also recognize the fetus or “unborn child” as a crime victim, at least for purposes of homicide or feticide.[3]The legislation was both hailed and vilified by various legal observers who interpreted the measure as a step toward granting legal personhood to human fetuses, even though the bill explicitly contained a provision excepting abortion, stating that the bill would not “be construed to permit the prosecution” “of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf”, “of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child” or “of any woman with respect to her unborn child.”The bill contained the alternate title of Laci and Conner’s Law after the California mother (Laci Peterson) and fetus (Conner Peterson) whose deaths were widely publicized during the later stages of the congressional debate on the bill in 2003 and 2004. (see Scott Peterson and Laci Peterson). Scott Peterson was convicted of double homicide under California’s fetal homicide law.

  • notation

    Why don’t you tell us all your so “subtle” reasoning as to what access to abortion IS predicated upon. Since when is it up to you or any other 3rd party to decide whether a woman should be trusted to make decisions about her own medical care? Is there a litmus test for men? Do THEY have to pass some arbitrary standard to be accorded the right to decide what they will do with THEIR bodies?

  • revbookburn

    The remarks of some jihadists and cultists make it necessary to state the obvious. The Tebows were further enabling a theocratic Mullah. Like the Prejeans, maybe they were just dumb or naive, but they provided fuel and credibility to a dangerous extremist. James Dobson/ Focus on the Family accumulated so much influence in DC (during the Bush/ ‘faith-based’/ Taliban-influenced years) that there were no legal consequences when there was child sexual abuse at Dobson’s Christian youth camp. Now the nation has a further enabled mentally-challenged cleric who not only wants laws/ public policies for all the completely end access to birth control and abortion, but impact the sexual freedom of every adult, plus intensify censorship, and predictably to actually increase legislation against victimless “crimes.”

  • aeaustin

    Religious propaganda was out of place in the Super Bowl ads. Very poor decision to politicize this national sports event!!

  • kreator6996

    Still, the problem with this whole Tebow thing is that it has NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTION,yet directs viewers to an anti-choice, anti-gay group.Its dishonest and decietful.I guess all the kids that dont win Heismans God didnt plan for or give a darn about.I guess other women, who ignored a doctors advice, only to have their child born with the diseases and birth defects the doctor correctly predicted, and her child lived in agony for 11 months before the child died.

  • rohitcuny

    I disagree with those who think there should be no reproductive rights. But I disagree even more with those who think that “right to choose” comes without responsibility because it is a “constitutional right.” It is not a constitutional right – constitutional rights were enacted when the constitution was written, and added to by constitutional amendments which THE NATION APPROVED. A constitutional right cannot be created just by Justice Blackmun and his allies simply SAYING that it exists.There is no constitutional right to drive a car or to practice medicine. You have a right to drive a car IF you pass a driving test. You can practice medicine IF you have a medical degree.And you can have an abortion IF you have a dire need. But not otherwise, and not as a matter of constitutional right.

  • youba

    Pretty well-played by Focus on the Family. Get everyone up in arms, then lob a softball. It made the other side look extreme in its opposition to the ad. Very, very smart. The only potential miss is that some viewers may not have even noticed that this was “THE” controversial abortion ad.Deeper down, probably the most effective part of the ad was making an emotional, dread-filled decision for those who face it seem easy, light and humorous. It implied, “Make the ‘right’ decision, and everyone will live happily ever-after.”

  • youba

    Oh, and BTW ROHITCUNY, you have no grasp of constitutional law or the concept of constitutional rights. You have an opinion, but that is all that it is. And on this matter, the opinions of the SC justices matter much more than yours.

  • jayrkay

    The article and comments are very amusing.As a matter of fact,my family were all watching SuperBowl, and at each commercial, they were all running to the bathroom, even though we have many BRs.As matter of fact, I was more amused by this back and forth running to the BR, I forgot to watch any of the commercials. Ofcourse, the half time show was better orchestrated than the Ball game itself.

  • svcmstwm

    Can’t believe so many folks have so much free time!

  • PSolus

    I was disappointed by the ad; I was hoping to see some real lunacy.Instead, all I heard was the invocation of the superstitious concept that a favorable outcome is a “miracle”.

  • iamweaver

    If Planned Parenthood respected my choices, they’d shut up and go out of business!!!!POSTED BY: MOMOF20YOI guess that you don’t know that one of the prime goals of Planned Parenthood is “parenthood”…See – those in the pro-choice movement *do* respect your choice – that’s why it’s called “pro-choice”, not “pro-abortion”. In fact, many of us in the pro-choice movement believe strongly in the sanctity of life – I certainly do. But I also recognize that my feelings on the matter stem directly from my religious beliefs, and are simply not shared in their entirety by an enormous number of people. What’s more, I cannot “prove” by belief in being fully human at or close to conception. I’m not interested in legislating observing the Sabbath or worshiping my God either, though I believe strongly in those things, too.I have to admit – I’m always confused about religious members of the pro-life movement who are quite comfortable with forcing their religious views on others via the government on this purely religious-based matter, while being quite against using the government in a scripture-supported way to perform Christian virtues of charity, which *are* universally-recognized mores.

  • FactChecker1

    Abortion has NEVER been legal in the Phillipines and punishment is severe. Anyone wonder what doctor might have suggested to Mrs. Tebow that she terminate her pregnancy? Anybody suspicious that the facts here have been embellished for the sake of drama? With all of her Christian values, apparently Mrs. Tebow does not practice the 9th Commandment.

  • APaganplace

    I had the game on. Didn’t actually mark the ads. It was the ones with chickens in a panic, right? That was actually pretty funny. :)

  • MillPond2

    Please, let’s forget the ads. I really wonder if they had any impact on anybody – particularly those whose moral compasses are already locked in position.The most moving aspect of last night was the victory by the New Orleans Saints. After all the misery and tragedy that southeastern Louisiana endured in the wake of hurricane Katrina in 2005, it was uplifting to know that those city and parish folks experienced something to feel good about.

  • Spiritof761

    Instead of any talk whatsoever about aborting a fetus, we see a football player son tackling his mother. Hard. Very hard. Is misogyny (followed by an apology) what focus on the family is now promoting?

  • coloradodog

    Tebow thrashing his mother seemed bizarrely Oedepusian to me. At least it wasn’t condescending and preachy like Dobson.

  • ZZim

    Tempest in a teapot. Toldja so.

  • kentigereyes

    I watched the entire football game. GO SAINTS!!!!!!!!!!! I did not watch one second of the ads. GO ME! TFL, Ken

  • rlj1

    The ad was lame very lame. What man tackles their mother. The Snickers ad, with Betty White, was funny and memorable.

  • notation

    Rohit, you’ve made this same statement before, and have failed to answer the question posed to you: who is going to determine what is “dire need”? You? The government? The church? Based on what standard and proved how? You cite driving as an example of your argument, but driving is not, and never has been, a “right”. There is no “right” to a fair trial in the Constitution or its amendments, but nonetheless, the people of this nation have said right, and the right to privacy is no different, simply because you don’t like it.

  • notation

    Oh, and BTW ROHITCUNY, you have no grasp of constitutional law or the concept of constitutional rights. You have an opinion, but that is all that it is. And on this matter, the opinions of the SC justices matter much more than yours.

  • US-conscience

    I’ll bet that every person who is commenting, and every person who watched the super bowl and every person who was at the super bowl….is quite happy that their mother CHOSE to have them instead of CHOOSING to have them killed before they where born. Choose Life, its worth living.

  • streff

    On Sunday, February 7, 2009 when the majority, if not all churches in Washington, DC were closed

  • notation

    Gee, what an original thought, US-conscience. Never heard that one before. /sarcasm/If one had been aborted, one wouldn’t have the capacity to know it. If you’d been aborted, no one would miss you. Millions of fertilized eggs are expelled daily, dear. Are you going to mourn over them? They’re no more capable of conscious thought than a fetus is, and their loss doesn’t have the slightest effect on anyone. You’re another brain-washed nut who thinks that everyone born had a mother who was opposed to abortion rights, and that anyone who supports a woman’s right to choose will always abort any pregnancy. That’s why no one takes your kind seriously.

  • Bluefish2012

    Notation says: “You probably don’t even notice your fly’s down.”Now there’s a service, PP: teach ‘em to zipper up. You stick to that and I’ll send $$.

  • Bluefish2012

    Notation says: “You probably don’t even notice your fly’s down.”Now there’s a great service for PP: teach ‘em how to stay zippered up–it’s the best birth control there is.

  • EdgewoodVA

    I still believe this ad was a huge waste of money, telling pretty much everyone nothing new. That money could’ve been spent on the millions of needy children who are already here. By drawing so much attention to the abortion issue and pretty little Timmy, FOTF took it off those children who need our help due to wide-spread and tragic factors (like the Haiti quake) that make their lives hell on earth.Each day at work I see an unfortunate child who was born with brain damage so acute that we’re not even sure he’s aware of his own existence, or is instead trapped in a body that tortures him with unexpressed pain or emotional anguish that will never be relieved. He’s wheel-chair bound, completely unable to care for himself, and many days is unable to open his eyes for long due to almost-hourly seizures. It’s agony to see him suffer such a cruel fate, but the fact is, he’s here now, and FOTF isn’t exactly rushing in to help. Advocating for a life like his would speak volumes about a supposedly genuine commitment to ALL life, yet Timmy’s saintly mommy decided to highlight her handsome little pop-culture hero instead of using that money to pay for this child’s care, or to sit with other less-photogenic heartbreakers like him, look me in the eye and say, “I’m glad his mom chose life.”

  • thebump

    The abortion industry’s sick, hysterical reaction to a simple story of a family’s gratitude for life — well, it tells you all you need to know, does it not?

  • mark16

    If I’m not mistaken, the ad you link to was in fact shown–during the pregame show. The tackle ad was aired during the game.And evaluating the effectiveness of the ad only by looking at it in isolation is meaningless. The ad was shown in the context of a huge amount of advance publicity, courtesy of FOTF’s critics. They thus had the luxury of knowing that the audience went into it with complete knowledge of their message.

  • rohitcuny

    Oh, and BTW ROHITCUNY, you have no grasp of constitutional law or the concept of constitutional rights. You have an opinion, but that is all that it is. And on this matter, the opinions of the SC justices matter much more than yours.The truth is that Supreme Court is not sacred and Obama HAS criticized their most recent decision. We all have to use our intelligence, May I recommend that you use yours.

  • rohitcuny

    Then praytell, what rights do I have, exactly?

  • Fred217

    I think the real story with this ad is the homophobic agenda of Focus on the Family. Apparently, fear of orchestrated hate campaigns caused CBS to reject a gay dating ad, one that has none of the violence and misogyny which permeates many Super Bowl commercials each year. It is, in short, charming, can be seen here

  • davemichelle09

    Here is where we are as a nation.Much hoopla is made over whether it is appropriate or not to present an advertisement over the issue of abortion or the pro life stance. But nary a word is heard or written about the ad by xbox360 or whatever about Satanism, demons and death with a titile of “hell awaits”! Parents all across the land will sit back and keep quiet while this kind of stuff is marketed to their children.Take an internal poll. Will God Bless America for promoting abortions or promoting Satanic games for adults and children. Probably neither!

  • SarahBB

    Ten seconds is up.

  • BeanerECMO

    Did anyone notice that the PP ad featured persons of color to get out PP’s message? Has anyone noticed where PP put their large center in Houston? Do you believe the pitchmen know about PP’s heritage from Magaret Sanger (founder of what is PP now)? PP is still promoting their (and Sanger’s) view of eugenics – focusing on abortions for inner-city residents.

  • f10r1n0

    god, god, god, god, faith, spiritual, god. Why can’t we talk about anything else in this country? Why are we so pragmatic about everything else (Toyota breaks! Universal health care!), but anything that is told is church is been blindly followed?

  • John1263

    Everyone excepting a handful of dangerous psychopaths is pro life. That is not the issue. The only real issue is whether you think you and your loved ones get to make the most intimate and imporant life altering decisions or the government makes those decisions for you. The anti-choice lobby wants government to intrude, to use the power of the state to deny people the right to make their own intimate decisions, and instead be dictated to by beaurocrats and politicians.

  • harrisonppicot

    I wonder why anyone would imagine that the woman next door needs your help, or your congressman’s help in making serious decisions about abortion or birth control. Abortion is tragedy for all concerned, hardly helped by the rantings of people with no stake who are today ignoring all the people of the world, including at least half the children in the USA who need more water, more food, more clothing and a better education. If anyone wants to do something for children, there are plenty waiting. And for those who think that God has given them the right to harass their neighbors, isn’t God still able punish the “wicked”? Is that the reason good people remember to share with those less fortunate? Let those without sin cast stones.

  • John1263

    Constitutional rights did not come into being when the constitution was written, and the 9th Amendment says so. The Bill of Rights lays out a set of fundamental protections against the government intruding into you NATURAL RIGHTS. these are rights that exist independant of any Constitution, idependant of government. Government is supposed to exist to protect those fundamental rights. When Madison originall y argued against adding a bill of rights he said that te danger was the future generations would construe the list as full and definitive. He argued that liberty should be as braodly construend as possible. Hence the 9th amendment which esentially says just because they did not put it in the list does not mean it isn’t your right. Government does not “grant” us liberty, government exists to protect liberty. Liberty is not absolute, but it is meant to be as broadly interpreted as possible while maintaining a civilized society. And no, paying taxes is not an infringment of your liberty. It is a government al function that exists through specific powers in the Constitution.

  • ElrodinTennessee

    Rohit,”The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”In other words, rights exists beyond those specifically enumerated in the Constitutional document itself. The Constitution leaves open the process for determining and, just as importantly, protecting these “unenumerated rights”. If this sounds like the pretext for a living and evolving Constitution then it’s because the framers intended the Constitution to be that way. They had no intention of locking us in 1787 for all time, which is why they recognized that not every right was actually spelled out in letter in the original Bill of Rights.

  • John1263

    The charging a person with murder for killing the unborn is simple. the law was perverted by politicians who are seeking to set legal precent for using the power of the state to dictate reproductive decisions. It is how law works. You set a precedent and then other decsions flow from that decision. If you pervert the law to say killing the unborn in an act of murder against the mom you are creating exactly the legal conundrum some of you point out. It is not because it is actually murder, just a legal trick by politicians who are trying to use government to make your decisions for you based on their specific religious dogma.

  • John1263

    People love to rant and rave about this because they have no personal culpabitlity. They want to feel that they are super dee duper special because they are doing things because their buddy God told them to. And with something like this there is no down side. When those unwanted children are born, when the crippled, the deformed, the retarded child is thrust unwillingly onto a family that does not have the means or desire to care for it, there is no culpability for the anti-choice folks. They slough it off as “God’s will” as if God did not create the minds with which we have created modern medicine, as if God did not bless certain people with the skills and intelligence to create sonograms, and prenatal testing…..ALWAYS be very wary of the person who claims that they have special knowledge of God’s will. It is almost always the case that what they mean is they have an agenda, it involves pain for someone esle, and they have no rational justification for what they want to do.

  • me110g

    Let’s face it friends people will believe what they want to believe. On any side of any issue.

  • greatgran1

    When is celebrating life ever offensive? It was a lovely statement of celebration of life, We have freedom of speech but some seem to think you have no right to express your opinion unless you agree with them. Focus on the Family is a wonderful organization that promotes the family in many areas. Our family thought the Tebow commercial was awesome. We loved it.

  • notation

    I think the right to KILL, and without having to give a reason, is not a constitutional right. Actually I would have supported Mrs. Tebow had she had an abortion in the circumstances which she faced. But I do not support purely elective abortions, WITHOUT THEIR BEING ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE WOMAN’S “CHOICE”.POSTED BY: ROHITCUNYYou “don’t think” women have a right to decide for themselves? Too bad for you, dear, they do. Your ability to understand that, your approval of it, and your permission aren’t required.

  • gretel1

    US-Conscience — you lose that bet.

  • notation

    NOTATION, it’s the law that grants women access to abortion. Yes, a third party, the law, decides the arbitrary standards (They are arbitrary, and have changed over the years.) under which a woman is granted access to abortion. The law doesn’t require that the woman be worthy of trust or respect. The law doesn’t care if no one values her. She doesn’t have to be sympathetic or telegenic or articulate. She can be dense and clueless, as you appear to be. In your foggy state, you seem to imagine that I think this is bad. That demonstrates just how mistaken you can be.POSTED BY: WYLIED

  • Mini22

    The most effective Pro-Choice spot wasn’t even an ad. To see Drew Bree’s at the end of the game holding his son, overcome by the moment with joy and sharing it with his son was worth more then any million dollar commercial. Sometimes a picture really is really worth a thousand words and sometimes people can come to their own conclusions without all the lights and glitz.

  • hyjanks

    If the Tebows really “value life”, maybe they should have sponsored another 30-second ad showing a woman propped up against a garbage can in a back alley, bleeding profusely from her abdomen as Dr. Coat Hanger sprints away clutching a few dollar bills in his fist.

  • notation

    If a woman is not aborting a life, then why should it be traumatic? After all you claim in isn’t a life as valuable as your own.The procedure is traumatic for some women, not all. For some women who are carrying a much-wanted pregnancy that has gone terribly wrong, having to go through an abortion is a traumatic experience. For some women who are pregnant and don’t wish to continue the pregnancy, the reaction to abortion is relief.

  • cllrdr

    A very slick fund-raising tool. “Focus on the Family” is hemmoraging money to the point where it’s on its last legs. Their efforts at pushing gays and lesbians back into the closet have failed for an America that can’t get enough of Neil Patrick Harris, Adam Lambert, Rachel Maddow and Ellen Degeneres. So they’re making this “Hail Mary Pass” via a trumpted-up “controversy” over an ad for loving one’s mother. Next: The Flag and Apple pie.

  • notation

    Did anyone notice that the PP ad featured persons of color to get out PP’s message? Has anyone noticed where PP put their large center in Houston? Do you believe the pitchmen know about PP’s heritage from Magaret Sanger (founder of what is PP now)? PP is still promoting their (and Sanger’s) view of eugenics – focusing on abortions for inner-city residents.POSTED BY: BEANERECMONo, probably not. You probably don’t even notice your fly’s down.

  • GordonShumway

    I’m not so sure the whole affair wasn’t about Tebow instead of the important issue it could have advertized. Really a shame when you think about it………….

  • princeleo

    I’m really sick of all this yakking about Super Bowl ads. No one will remember them tomorrow.

  • Yankeesfan1

    Joyner supports having his grandchild killed. What a guy.

  • notation

    Notation says: “You probably don’t even notice your fly’s down.”Now there’s a service, PP: teach ‘em to zipper up.You stick to that and I’ll send $$.POSTED BY: BLUEFISH2012

  • eddie111

    An atheist friend of mine directed me to this forum by describing it as “hysterical”. Let me see if I have this right…pro-life means anti-choice, pro-choice means anti-life. Pro-life advocates will tell you that they believe in the sanctity of life while overwhelmingly supporting the death penalty and unnecessary wars. Hmmm.Life begins at conception. Life begins at birth. Life begins at 40. Life begins at retirement. Which bumper sticker should I believe?

Read More Articles

colbert
Top 10 Reasons We’re Glad A Catholic Colbert Is Taking Over Letterman’s “Late Show”

How might we love Stephen Colbert as the “Late Show” host? Let us count the ways.

emptytomb
God’s Not Dead? Why the Good News Is Better than That

The resurrection of Jesus is not a matter of private faith — it’s a proclamation for the whole world.

noplaceonearth
An Untold Story of Bondage to Freedom: Passover 1943

How a foxhole that led to a 77-mile cave system saved the lives of 38 Ukrainian Jews during the Holocaust.

shutterstock_148333673
Friend or Foe? Learning from Judas About Friendship with Jesus

We call Judas a betrayer. Jesus called him “friend.”

shutterstock_53190298
Fundamentalist Arguments Against Fundamentalism

The all-or-nothing approach to the Bible used by skeptics and fundamentalists alike is flawed.

shutterstock_178468880
Mary Magdalene, the Closest Friend of Jesus

She’s been ignored, dismissed, and misunderstood. But the story of Easter makes it clear that Mary was Jesus’ most faithful friend.

shutterstock_186795503
The Three Most Surprising Things Jesus Said

Think you know Jesus? Some of his sayings may surprise you.

shutterstock_185995553
How to Debate Christians: Five Ways to Behave and Ten Questions to Answer

Advice for atheists taking on Christian critics.

HIFR
Heaven Hits the Big Screen

How “Heaven is for Real” went from being an unsellable idea to a bestselling book and the inspiration for a Hollywood movie.

shutterstock_186364295
This God’s For You: Jesus and the Good News of Beer

How Jesus partied with a purpose.

egg.jpg
Jesus, Bunnies, and Colored Eggs: An Explanation of Holy Week and Easter

So, Easter is a one-day celebration of Jesus rising from the dead and turning into a bunny, right? Not exactly.

SONY DSC
Dear Evangelicals, Please Reconsider Your Fight Against Gay Rights

A journalist and longtime observer of American religious culture offers some advice to his evangelical friends.