jump to navigation

Tim Tebow and Focus on the Family January 26, 2010

Posted by A. Robinson in Life.
Tags: ,
trackback

So, yeah.  Abortion.  Recently Tim Tebow, golden boy of the University of Florida’a offense, has agreed to be in a Focus on the Family commercial that will air during the Super Bowl.  Surprisingly, I first read the story on the E! News website (way to go, entertainment news!).  To make things easy, I’ll recap the issue:  Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam, are going to talk about how Pam refused to abort him despite medical advice.  Women’s groups are pissed, and lobbying CBS to pull the ad.

Alright, so I might have already commented on abortion on this blog, but I’m going to do it again.  I have to say, I find the statements by the Women’s groups really, really disturbing.  It’s this comment that’s upsetting:

Citing the history of violence against doctors who perform abortions and the recent murder of Dr. George Tiller in Kansas, the letter continued pointedly: “We sincerely hope you do not want CBS associated with this brand of un-American hate.”

Now, I can understand this kind of anger if CBS is not allowing Pro-Choice groups to run advertisements during the Super Bowl.  I agree with equal representation; if CBS is trying to block pro-choice commercials…well, then, that’s a serious problem.  However, from the articles I’ve read, this doesn’t seem to be the case.  Instead, women’s rights groups are hissing about a “hate filled” agenda.  Also, it’s important to note that no one knows what this commercial says, except that CBS has released statements that the 30 second piece never uses the word “abortion,” though one assumes it talks about “choosing life” and “keeping babies.”

It’s the continued, sustained violent rhetoric that I have such problem with.  Not everyone who is pro-life is also a crazy, violent, murderous nutjob.  In the same way, pro-choicers are not all passive, peace-loving, non-agressive folk (you should you-tube pro-choice violence.  There’s a video of a pro-choice woman taking out a peaceful pro-life protestor).  The fact that organizations on both sides of the picket-line keep using incredibly divisive, incredibly charged language is dangerous, in my opinion.

Additionally, I hate it when people who are pro-choice act like the idea of keeping a baby is a terrible option.  In one of the articles, a women’s group basically gives CBS the big wagging finger of shame for aligning itself with a pro-life political stance (though, if CBS believes in all the commercials it airs, it also thinks Axe body spray is basically female supermodel attractant).  It seems to me that Focus on the Family–which, I’ll go ahead and say it, is mostly a nutball organization–is presenting another choice to women across the country.  They’re not saying don’t abort, but they are saying that there’s a choice for life.  I think that real feminists would put a certain amount of value on the power of knowledge.  There was once a time when women didn’t have the option for abortion at all; there was also a time when a women didn’t have the right to choose whether she kept or aborted her fetus.  In a world where women are still wrestling for equality with men, we should be focusing on educating our daughters, not polarizing them.  What a sad world it is when someone who gets unintentionally pregnant thinks she has to abort or has to keep the baby to term because that’s what she’s been taught.

The real loser here is the Super Bowl, really.  When the station cuts to break, I want to watch ads with dancing frogs, or people falling down, not get inundated with the same political mumbo-jumbo that I see every day.  Come on, CBS!  Do us all a favor and keep politics separate from football.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Guillaume - January 27, 2010

My chief objection, until now, was the whole “Man telling women what they should be doing with their body” aspect. We had plenty enough of that in the past.

Given, however, that it’s going to be specifically about how HE was not aborted (the earlier article I had seen conveniently forgot that element), that rather neatly handle that, so, aside from the “Shouldn’t we put politics aside for that one evening”.

Yeah, pretty much right along with you on that one.

dorianagraye - February 1, 2010

Amen. Let women make their own decisions. I think it’s important for women to be able to make educated decisions, though, and all of this hyperbolized, violent rhetoric from both the pro-choice and pro-life sides is detrimental to that. Make your point, just…gah, don’t be so crazy about it.

Agreed.

2. Lindsey - January 30, 2010

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123035871

I am and will always be pro-choice, meaning an actual choice, not a “you must abort it” mentality.

Even if this commercial is flipping fantastic, it’s still a drag that they’re now choosing to air advocacy commercials during the Super Bowl. Grant us a few hours away from the real world. That’s what we want.

On the Tiller note, I’m glad they convicted Roeder. I was pissed that the judge even contemplated allowing him to defend his actions based on trying to prevent abortions. Shit, cold blooded murder is still murder. Get the clinic shut down, don’t kill the doctor. I hate people. Not all of them, but those nutjobs out there, sheesh.

dorianagraye - February 1, 2010

Read the NPR article, and I wholeheartedly agree: the SuperBowl is supposed to be a diversion, not another political platform. I watch the game mostly for the fun commercials. I’m against all types of advocacy commercials–regardless of the stance–inundating the game. This just opens the door for all sorts of politicized messages. Bleh. I see that crap every day; I don’t need more of that crap.

Although I am pro-life, for me, that’s a personal decision. I do not, nor will I ever, believe that abortion should be made illegal in this country. If there’s one thing I am passionately against, it’s taking away rights. If all abortion was criminalized, it wouldn’t keep them from happening. Women would just go back to using coat hangars, crazy antifreeze douches, and anything else they could think of to terminate pregnancies. I really think that by making 1st and 2nd trimester abortions illegal is a crime against womanhood.

(Having said that, I don’t think that 3rd trimester abortions should be legalized, either).

I totally hear you on the Tiller case. That man is a total nutjob and deserves whatever sentencing he gets. Regardless of whether Roeder believes that abortion is murder, that gives him absolutely NO RIGHT to kill anyone else. Good lord. How deluded do you have to be to justify that kind of crap? I mean, I guess I have no idea how he can even begin to reconcile that kind of hypocrisy.

Guillaume - February 2, 2010

You know, I can’t help but find it illustrative of the uselessness of political nametags that you and I see eye to eye on abortion, except the part where you call it pro-life and I call it pro-choice.

Lindsey - February 3, 2010

I think you might be pro-choice the way that I am. You support women’s right to choose, but you wouldn’t make that choice yourself. You closet liberal.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: