Pro-life, anti-gay CBS
Q: The conservative Christian group Focus on the Family is sponsoring a pro-life ad, featuring football star Tim Tebow, during Sunday's Super Bowl. Should CBS show the ad? Should CBS allow other faith-based groups to buy Super Bowl ads promoting their beliefs on social issues? Is a major sporting event, or a TV ad campaign, an appropriate venue for discussing such vital and divisive culture-war issues like abortion?
CBS made the wrong decision, but not for reasons most people suggest. Having rejected a Super Bowl ad from ManCrunch.com, a gay online dating service, as too controversial, CBS will nonetheless air a so-called pro-life/anti-choice ad sponsored by Focus on the Family. Both moves are probably good business, but lousy public policy. In fact, the Focus ad is a genuine threat to public health and that is why CBS is wrong.
I have no issue with political ads during the Super Bowl, especially the Focus ad, which actually confounds the usual pro-life/pro-choice dichotomy which defines our ongoing cultural struggles with abortion policy. In fact, the controversial ad affirms a woman's right to choose, at least some of the time. It also demonstrates the absurdity of calling one's self pro-life when that position advocates ignoring professionals whose only job is nurturing health and life.
While certainly not their intent, the Focus ad reminds us that both sides affirm life and choice, each in their own way. So in that sense, the ad is quite interesting. But that is hardly the whole story here.
In terms of business and the bottom line, given where the vast majority of Americans stand, and what images we are comfortable with, CBS chose the safest path by rejecting an ad which culminates in two men grabbing each other while watching a football game. Given that CBS is there primarily to make money their decision actually makes sense even if it is lamentable to a portion of their audience.
But as a network, CBS also bears an obligation to be socially responsible and the ad sponsored by Focus is anything but. Telling the story of Florida football star Tim Tebow's mother and her decision to carry her baby to term, the ad also celebrates that she did so contrary to medical advice.
Suggesting to tens of millions of viewers that it's wise to ignore the advice of medical professionals, and further suggesting that doing so always works out well is dangerously irresponsible. And it is because of that dangerous irresponsibility that CBS erred in accepting this particular ad.
The Super Bowl is used to sell everything from beer to financial services, so why not views on abortion? But when pro-life becomes advocacy for willful disregard of modern medicine married to a fairy tale ending, we should all say, no.
By
Brad Hirschfield
|
February 2, 2010; 11:13 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Safi's "Memories of Muhammad" |
Next: Pure religion in Haiti
Posted by: nikosd99 | February 8, 2010 9:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It's not really even about the double standards with the gay dating service... That's a commercial enterprise.
In previous years, they've run Fundie ads while denying the UCC the right to run an ad saying they *don't* reject gay people... On the grounds it was 'non-commercial.' and 'too controversial' ...To not try to make a 'controversy' out of other people's lives and souls.
I dunno about you guys, but speaking of Bud Light, I don't let Super Bowl commercials tell me what *swill* I drink, never mind the disposition of my human life, spirit, and civil rights.
'Focus on the Family' can go sit under a Clydesdale about it. Whatever.
Posted by: APaganplace | February 8, 2010 8:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Seems to me that too many Christians don't even like most of the people who are *here* in this life before starting to claim they know when they should be allowed to tell a woman what should happen in her own body.
Motherhood is *sacred* in my religion, not something to be imposed so arbitrarily by another.
Never mind based on a commercial next to the Bud Light.
Posted by: APaganplace | February 8, 2010 8:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Since when it bad for a mother to risk herself for baby."
Since never?
"Does this guy really think the point of this ad is to promote defiance toward your Doctor?"
I don't know what this guy really thinks?
"It is quite clear that the doctors saw the baby as nusance and that is why the abortion was recommended."
You are incorrect; this is not clear at all.
"It is amazing how someone could twist the meaning to what they want."
As you did in your previous sentence.
"What a loss there has been."
Has there?
"Who knows how many potential stars have been aborted?"
No one.
Posted by: PSolus | February 5, 2010 6:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
lepidopteryx:
I can't answer your question because I don't know if those women were "simply insufficiently faithful, charitable, holy, and/or sober" I do know that all things work for the good to those who love the Lord and are called according to His purpose.(Romans 8:28) I also know that I have survived situations where I could have been killed or seriously injured, but came through without a scratch. When my daughter was very young she experienced a sudden serious illness that I was not aware of because I was not at home at the time. I did not have a telephone so that I could be reached. I awakened at a very early hour with a heavy burden on my heart for my daughter. I got out of bed and prayed for her, not even knowing why or what I was praying for. Later that morning I found out that she was in the hospital and had been in pain all night until the very hour that I had prayed for her. At that point she turned over and promptly fell fast asleep. I called my pastor and we annointed her with oil and asked for God's healing. Within a short time she was running up and down the halls of the hospital and was sent home that very day. While in high school, one of my sons developed cancer of the thyroid of which we were not aware. He just felt punky. It wasn't the sort of thing that we felt the urgency to send him to the doctor, but it just so happened that we did have a doctor's appointment for one of the other children that turned out we didn't need because of a bizarre change in circumstances. Rather than cancelling, we sent the son instead. The doctor's experienced eye noticed a very, very slight swelling in his neck. As soon as the biopsy report came back, he was in the hospital having the cancer removed successfully.
Scripture points out that some Christians may be bitten by serpents or perhaps poisoned and it will not harm them. It also states that God gives angels charge over us to keep us from harm. But it also states that some Christians are weak and sickly and some have even died because they partake in the Lord's Supper unworthily. (1 Corinthians 11:29-31)
I suggest you read the Faith chapter, Hebrews 11 and I'll comment more on the subject later.
Posted by: nikosd99 | February 5, 2010 6:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Aww come on, cut the homosexuals a break, really.
Posted by: cmarshdtihqcom | February 4, 2010 9:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I have no problem with FOF spending their millions on an anti-choice ad ("pro-life| is a misnomer because they are no where near "pro-life" when it comes to not condemning capital punishment and pre-emptive war)
What really bothers me is CBS granting FOF free speech while denying it to Mancrunch. FOF and Mancrunch are both commercial enterprises (albeit FOF hides behind the cross and their tax exempt status to claim they are not). To allow one and deny the other represents the threatening agenda of the "Christian" right toward theocracy in America.
Posted by: coloradodog | February 4, 2010 6:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Nikos, women die in childbirth every day. Does that mean that the ones who die are simply insufficiently faithful, charitable, holy, and/or sober?
Ket, no one said it was "bad" for a mother to risk her life for her baby. But any time it comes down to the possibility of saving another's life at the risk of your own, you should have the option to save your own, even if that other person is inside your body.
Posted by: lepidopteryx | February 3, 2010 11:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
As we all know, childbearing can be a strenuous time and, at times, a very dangerous experience for women. Who can count how many women have died giving birth? However, there seems to be a provision giving safe passage to certain women. It is found in 1 Timothy 2:15 "Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."
Is it possible that Mrs. Tebow knew of this "promise" and elected to trust in God rather than follow the advice of her doctors? I'm just speculating since I never heard her side of the story. Maybe it will come out in the ad during the game.
Posted by: nikosd99 | February 3, 2010 12:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Since when it bad for a mother to risk herself for baby. Does this guy really think the point of this ad is to promote defiance toward your Doctor? It is quite clear that the doctors saw the baby as nusance and that is why the abortion was recommended. It is amazing how someone could twist the meaning to what they want. What a loss there has been. Who knows how many potential stars have been aborted?
Posted by: kert1 | February 2, 2010 2:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Rabbi Brad, saying that one TV ad will dissuade Americans from acting on medical professional's advice is grossly disingenuous. We already ignore most of the advice we get from medical professionals. That's the reason we prefer others pay for our health care services.
On the other hand, medical professionals aren't so darned smart, either. Everybody I know who died was under a doctor's care, at the time.
Finally, "socially responsible," at CBS comes right after "cut, print, that's a wrap."
Posted by: alltheroadrunnin | February 2, 2010 2:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.

Twitter










lepidopteryx:
I had said that I would post more on the subject at a later date. I have done that on Richard Dawkins' column titled, The Great Tim Tebow Fallacy. It also appears under the same debate of CBS' Super Bowl ads. Rather than repeat myself, I direct you there should you desire to read more of my thoughts.