From our Blog

7 Responses

1. 

   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.
2. 

   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.
3. 

   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.
4. 

   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..
5. 

   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.
6. 

   I don’t see anything wrong with airing the commercial. I thought liberals didn’t believe in censorship so why are they complaining.

   Steve talks about an “add” and “adds” – shouldn’t that be “ad” (short for advertisement?)
7. 

   I don’t think something that is as personal as a choice of whether or not to carry a child should be reduced to advertising in either direction. It’s not about being liberal or conservative jean, it’s about knowing when something is your business. It is about choice and being anti-abortion is saying that women should be forced to breed.