I Don't Get Why The Upcoming Tebow Spot Is So Controversial?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
ABM

ABM

Happily Married In Music City, USA!
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
31,865
Likes
5,785
Points
113
Dang, the pro-choice folks sure are getting all willy-nilly about it. Shoot, even Gloria Allred is now getting involved....asserting that the ad is based upon falsehood. :lol:
 
Because feminists see it as an attack of a woman's right to choose; of course they fail to understand their right to choose is really their right to choose whether to engage in sexual activity or not (excluding rape, obviously).
 
The Sebastian Express said:
Because feminists see it as an attack of a woman's right to choose; of course they fail to understand their right to choose is really their right to choose whether to engage in sexual activity or not (excluding rape, obviously).
Click to expand...

OK, so what's so wrong with choosing life, as Tim's mom had? It's a celebration on their part. In fact, a rather heartwarming human interest message if you asked me.
 
There's nothing wrong with choosing life. You somewhat inquired as to why the spot was controversial and I explained that it was mainly feminists getting upset and why they were getting upset. I applaud Tebow for doing this ad, and believe I stated so in the religious player/screwup player thread.
 
The Sebastian Express said:
There's nothing wrong with choosing life. You somewhat inquired as to why the spot was controversial and I explained that it was mainly feminists getting upset and why they were getting upset.
Click to expand...

I just flat-out don't see how it's an "attack" on a woman's right to choose. :crazy: In fact, Tebow's mom very much had a right to choose. And, she made her choice.
 
The Sebastian Express said:
Because it is an anti-abortion law and it is promoting making abortion illegal, I believe.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't think abortion will be made illegal. However, I think it's a great idea to educate women on the potential dangers of such decisions. And, in the case of this ad, showing a positive outcome from a difficult decision.
 
I agree, although I think it is a great idea to educate everyone on the benefits of not getting an abortion and the value of life.
 
I'm what you would consider a very liberal person, so I am pro-choice. I absolutely hate abortions though. I wish we lived in a world where there weren't so many kids already without families, so that when a person doesn't want to keep their child, it would be easy to find them a family. I lose a great amount of respect for women who get abortions.
 
Whether you are for or against abortion, the key for me is that I do not believe the government should be involved in the decision. Just like I do not believe the government should be involved in gay marriage. It's not a decision for politicians to make.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Whether you are for or against abortion, the key for me is that I do not believe the government should be involved in the decision. Just like I do not believe the government should be involved in gay marriage. It's not a decision for politicians to make.
Click to expand...

Largely agree with you, except I'd expand "gay marriage" to "marriage." Government shouldn't handle "marriage" at all. For tax purposes and wills and whatever other procedural business there is, there should be civil unions for everyone, gay or straight. If people want to get "married" in addition, that's between them and their minister.
 
WTF is a Tebow?

edit: never mind, I googled it.

Pretty clear the whole story is pure fiction but not surprised ultra-fundamentalist network CBS is shameless enough to run it.

Pretty hard nowadays to find true facts to support their radically antiquated views.
 
Last edited:
Natebishop3 said:
Whether you are for or against abortion, the key for me is that I do not believe the government should be involved in the decision. Just like I do not believe the government should be involved in gay marriage. It's not a decision for politicians to make.
Click to expand...

The pro-life side sees abortion as taking the life of a human. Why shouldn't the government be involved in laws related to taking a human life? Should the government be involved if the child is a year old? 3 years old? etc, etc.
 
MARIS61 said:
WTF is a Tebow?

edit: never mind, I googled it.

Pretty clear the whole story is pure fiction but not surprised ultra-fundamentalist network CBS is shameless enough to run it.

Pretty hard nowadays to find true facts to support their radically antiquated views.
Click to expand...

Of course it is fiction. Who'd believe that a woman would be counseled to have an abortion, and yet "Choose" something different? And who'd believe that that little bundle of joy would grow up to be a Heisman-winning quarterback?

Hate on, progressives....hate on.

BTW...I watched every word of Jehmu Greene's interview with O'Reilly. Her contention is that this is a trick by an anti-gay, anti-abortion group (FotF) to undermine abortion and the woman's right to choose. However, she couldn't say how. This seems a celebration of a "woman's right to choose" and therefore something that she should be celebrating. She wasn't forced to do something she didn't want to do. The furor over this is immensely hypocritical.
 
My wife just entered her third trimester. I've seen pictures, video and sound from the fetus since she was 6 weeks old. What magically happens at 22 weeks that turns her from being a procedure away from the medical waste bin to a felony at 22 weeks, 1 day? "Viability"? Does that mean that anyone not viable to live without 24/7 invasive medical attention should be allowed to be terminated? Maybe that's apples and oranges, but I just don't get it.
 
when the Republicans had a born again President, a decided advantage in the Senate, and the Supreme Court, why didn't they challenge Roe v Wade once? It would seem that their fundamentalist base would want to know why they never once stood up and acted on their rhetoric :dunno: maybe because it is settled law and to do so would be political suicide as most of America is very much in favor of the right to choose?

STOMP
 
But when is the right to choose? Is it before or after conception? If you have sexual relations knowing full well that pregnancy is a very possible consequence, isn't your choice then? Why snuff out the possibility for human life?

This of course excludes rape-pregnancy which is a very, very sensitive issue.
 
The Sebastian Express said:
People have the right to choose not to have sex if they're not willing to handle the consequences.
Click to expand...
no shit! What does that have to do with the Roe v Wade decision that gave Americans the right to choose to have an abortion?

Nobody wants to have one, and many people (like me for instance) can't imagine having one with their significant other, but that doesn't mean that I want to take away the right for others to choose to have one if they deem that the right choice.

STOMP
 
Last edited:
The pro-death folks see any sort of ad against their viewpoint as an attack on themselves personally. It's just the way they are.
 
VanillaGorilla said:
Hm. Saying pro-death isn't an attack?
Click to expand...

Listening to a tv news show the other day, one of the people on it said "the pro-abortion group".

I don't know if that's what they really think that is what you would call that point of view (and actually don't know), or if they're purposely trying to miss label the group by calling them something that if you think about the name is pretty much something that can't be defend able.

No one is "pro abortion". They're pro choice. I would venture a bet that far more people who are pro choice are actually not in favor of abortions but believe someone else has the right to make their own personal choice.
 
julius said:
Listening to a tv news show the other day, one of the people on it said "the pro-abortion group".

I don't know if that's what they really think that is what you would call that point of view (and actually don't know), or if they're purposely trying to miss label the group by calling them something that if you think about the name is pretty much something that can't be defend able.

No one is "pro abortion". They're pro choice. I would venture a bet that far more people who are pro choice are actually not in favor of abortions but believe someone else has the right to make their own personal choice.
Click to expand...

I bet some of them believe that, and some of them are purposefully trying to mislabel people that are pro-choice. I have never heard anyone say that abortions are good or they like abortions.
 
julius said:
Listening to a tv news show the other day, one of the people on it said "the pro-abortion group".

I don't know if that's what they really think that is what you would call that point of view (and actually don't know), or if they're purposely trying to miss label the group by calling them something that if you think about the name is pretty much something that can't be defend able.
Click to expand...
bingo!

STOMP
 
I'm pro-death. I just don't see why we limit it to fetuses when there are perfectly acceptable adult candidates as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top