Focus On The Family, a Christian non-profit group, has purchased ad time during Sunday’s Super Bowl. The 30-second ad will feature Tim Tebow, a former quarterback with the University of Florida’s Gators and 2007 winner of the Heisman Trophy, along with his mother Pam.
It’s expected that the Tebows will give a personal message against abortion in the ad. Pam went against a doctor’s advice and decided to keep Tim despite medical risks.
“Tim and Pam share our respect for life and our passion for helping families thrive,” Jim Daly, president of Focus of the Family, said in a written statement on Jan. 15.
CBS is running into controversy regarding the ad, and it’s not the first time. In 2004 CBS rejected an ad buy from the “liberal-leaning United Church of Christ highlighting the UCCs welcoming stance toward gays and others who might fee shunned by more conservative churches.”
CBS is trying to figure out what to do. What do you think they will do? What should they do?
February 3rd, 2010 at 12:40 pm
If CBS was willing to reject a commercial that welcomed gays/lesbians then they should also reject something is pro-life. Both are touchy subjects with the American population and otherwise. Isn’t this supposed to be about the sport and not which side you choose on abortion, sexual preference, or religion? I think to be fair to everyone either they should desist in playing such commercials or they should allow other businesses to purchase ad-time in which to publish a commercial why the doctor may believe Pam Tebow to be irresponsible in her decision regardless of how things turned out. I reiterate why allow such a controversial commercial that will only upset a portion of viewers and others who simply hear of it and disrupt what is supposed to be a football game that demonstrates communication, teamwork, and fun.
February 4th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
I was interested in what Ashley had to say, but can’t agree. CBS may have made such a decision 16 years ago, but that doesn’t mean they must always make a similar decision. In fact, it’s more than likely they don’t. Many of the Superbowl commercials run the risk of offending some segment of viewers and not all are about football or communication, teamwork and fun, yet they are aired.
On the prolife vs. prochoice argument, prochoice supporters lose their credibility as soon as they preclude a mother’s right to choose to carry her child to term. To call Pam Tebow’s decision irresponsible just flies in the face of everything the term “prochoice” stands for. People need to be aware that there are choices besides abortion, even if prenatal testing indicates that something “might” be wrong with the unborn child. Especially given the fact that many children born under a similar cloud of uncertainty, and whose parents made the same difficult choice as the Tebows, are enjoying productive, healthy lives and contributing to their communities.
February 7th, 2010 at 5:36 am
I am looking forward to this commercial to air. This is hopefully going to be the turn around needed to make this a pro-life country again. We have a lot of work to do in this peaceful battle but we must make an effort to turn things around.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
First of all i dont see what this soubject has to do with football. and secondly people have the choice in life to do whatever they feel is in the best interest for them, as to who is right and wrong, its nobodies business. i dont feel that its right to force your opinions onto other people and to judge them either..
February 17th, 2010 at 1:04 pm
I have to say there is something to Ashely’s comment.The gay add that was banned was this year not 16 years ago. It was for a male only dating site I believe and was considered too controversial. However little public reply was made on why the add was banned. It’s a tricky topic on both issues though. Those who are Pro-Life or for Gay rights will likely see there add as resonable, harmless, and that there is no need to have it be censored. However some from both of these groups will feel the other add should have been banned. An argument could be made that America is becoming more and more diveded and these adds only help to strengthen this divide. Also an argument could be made that playing both would be the fair thing to do and may even lead to a more united country. It’s hard to say which is best but I think it really should have been both or niether.