Tim Tebow and his mother are set to air a commercial during the Super Bowl with Focus On The Family (a very active Christian group) under the name “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.” During his mother’s pregnancy she contracted an illness while on a missions trip. Doctors recommended she abort her fifth child, but she decided to give birth to Tim, who went on to be QB for the Florida Gators and win the 2007 Heisman Trophy.
CBS has approved a script for the commercial but USA Today reports that a final script must be submitted and approved before the February 7th game. It’s possible though we may never see the commercial, even if the final script is approved.
A coalition of women’s groups is desperately trying to get CBS to remove its support of the ad. It’s not the message they’re not in support of (I mean, who doesn’t want to celebrate family?) but they are very much against the group giving the message. “By offering one of the most coveted advertising spots of the year to an anti-equality, anti-choice, homophobic organization, CBS is aligning itself with a political stance that will damage its reputation, alienate viewers, and discourage consumers from supporting its shows and advertisers,” a letter from the Women’s Media Center to CBS said.
According to The Washington Post even one of CBS’s own employees has strong feelings about the situation. Gregg Doyel, a national columnist for CBSSports.com objected to the ad mainly because it airs during the big game. ”If you’re a sports fan, and I am, that’s the holiest day of the year,” he wrote. “It’s not a day to discuss abortion. For it, against it, I don’t care what you are. On Super Sunday, I don’t care what I am. Feb. 7 is simply not the day to have that discussion.”
Should the ad run during the Super Bowl? Does it matter one way or the other? What do you think?
Comments
Hope
January 27th, 2010 - 3:52:56 AM
Absolutely it should air! In fact I will watch the Superbowl if it does.
1
Sara Welsh
January 27th, 2010 - 5:53:30 AM
I think Focus On The Family has the same rights to advertise during the Super Bowl as any other company. It's freedom of speech and whomever has top dollar. If CBS doesn't have a problem with the ad, I'm not sure why these groups do. Thanks for commenting Hope!
2
Laura Morrison
January 28th, 2010 - 5:43:01 AM
Just what is the Women's Media Center afraid of? That folks will find out Tim Tebow lived because his Mom was anti-abortion? Or that a conservative viewpoint is actually heard on a channel where people might actually hear it? The Super Bowl is the perfect venue for Mr. Tebow to share his story. I'm not a sports fan and I wouldn't have any idea who Tim Tebow was if the commercial was run any other time. And Gregg Doyel calls the Super Bowl the "holiest day of the year," but let's not have anything that could be construed as holy content? C'mon people! I thought we lived in a free country, where everyone's opinion could be heard. Not very TOLERANT, people!
3
Sara Welsh
January 28th, 2010 - 6:37:46 AM
I think the Women's Media Center is trying to say that having a religious message is showing intolerance of those who don't feel the same way. However, would they feel the same way about a Planned Parenthood commercial?
4
Stacey Morrison
January 28th, 2010 - 11:49:11 AM
I don't have any problem with the commercial airing due to free speech. I am not sure the people that watch the Super Bowl are the right audience. I would also like the other side to be said. In Galveston a 2 year-old's body was found in a cooler on an island after her mother and step-father set her adrift in the water. Her parents were not married when she was born and decided not to get married and even split up. She married another guy who beat up the child and essentially suffocated her with pillows in punishment after she was doing what normal 2 year olds do. I wonder if she would have had a more humane death if her mother had had an abortion than dying at the hands of her step-father while her mother watched. Why do people like this even have children in the first place if they are only going to kill them? What is the point? I am all for saving children's lives, but why can't we save the lives of children already born instead of worrying about the lives of those not yet born?
5
Sara Welsh
January 28th, 2010 - 12:15:37 PM
That's a good point Stacey. Should there be a pro-adoption commercial aired? Or an anti-child abuse commercial aired? Has this one commercial opened the floodgates for more discussion or will people turn a deaf ear?
6
Stacey Morrison
January 28th, 2010 - 12:25:06 PM
There are over 700 children in the Houston, Texas, area alone that are waiting for adoption. The Child Protective Services are overworked and underpaid. We have women dropping off babies at fire departments, police departments and hospitals (which is legal in Texas) as well as leaving them in trash cans (which is illegal). I am not saying that these children should be aborted, but I am saying that we need to solve the needs of the people already born. Give the girls thinking about abortion a real alternative instead of the makeshift one we have. Why don't these kids know or have access to contraception? Obviously abstinence doesn't seem to be working in a lot of cases (note Sarah Palin's daughter becoming a teenage mother). I think Focus on the Family should focus on existing families and how teenage girls and boys can avoid this issue instead of trying to put a band-aid on a gushing wound.
7
Sara Welsh
January 28th, 2010 - 1:16:40 PM
Pro-Life is only one aspect of Focus on the Family's platform.
8
Steve Morrison
January 28th, 2010 - 1:46:40 PM
Stacey, whether or not the Super Bowl audience is the right audience for the message, is irrelevant. The folks paying money to air the commercial think so, and they have a right to air it. As for the other side's message... fine. If they reach deep enough into their pockets to pay for the commercial like everyone else paying for air time, then let them. This is a business venture... you pay for the air time, we'll run your commercial, within legal limits. As of this moment, I believe the 'anti-abortion' message is still legal. Anti-abortion and anti-child abuse are two completely different topics. Argue Jeffrey Dahmer should have been aborted to avoid all of his future crimes. Conversely, should Stephen Hawking have been aborted from his mother? Look at his contributions. Ah, but he is physically challenged and we should have mercy on him. As for the 700 children in Houston, fix the adoption problem(s) and get them homes. I work in the adoption community and watch a lot of children from all over the world suffering for a family and a home. Why? Mostly because of greed. Because of criminal behavior from adults. Fix it. Abortion is not the answer. You are correct. We need to fix the problems/fix the needs of existing children... and adults, as well. But not by killing other innocents. But we digress. Should Tebow be allowed to show his commercial? That's the issue here. I say a rousing YES! He has a legal message he wants the world to hear. He paid the fees. He has the right. Maybe if he tells his message and ends it with "Buy Coca Cola", it'd be all right?
9
Shirley McMonigle
January 28th, 2010 - 1:54:36 PM
I feel that they should air the commercial during the Super Bowl. I feel that if we can promote beer ads and all sorts of other family destroying promotions, we should be able to see something that has life behind and it and instead of destroying life. Are we saying there are no people that are for life of the unborn that would be watching the Super Bowl? What a farce. There are many God fearing Christians who are avid football fans and would support Focus on the Family and whatever it supports (the family).
10
Steve Morrison
January 28th, 2010 - 2:07:45 PM
Why isn't the Women's Media Center fighting to remove ads showing scantily clad women? There are minor children watching the Super Bowl. Those boys watching... leering... at the women in those commercials are learning that women are nothing but sexual objects to be exploited. Something you would think the Women's Media Center would be strongly against. The adolescent and teen girls watching the Bowl are learning that only statuesque buxom blondes are considered beautiful and that they (the girls) probably do not measure up. Again, something one would think the Women's Media Center should be opposed to. This is a far more dangerous message than anti-abortion/family values ever could be. But, again, where is the Women's Media Center?
11
L. Isom
January 28th, 2010 - 2:38:42 PM
Several people here have said exactly what I was going to say! Where is the Women's Media Center's outrage at the practically pornographic ads and half time entertainment? We have all seen the studies that show that porn leads to abuse of women and children. Since when has an anti-abortion stance lead to more abuse? There is no proof that an abortion would have prevented the abuse or death of a child. Maybe the mother wanted the baby and never considered abortion? Many children who are abused and murdered were actually wanted in the beginning! The murder of a child is still murder, whether it be before it is born or after. If you're so concerned about the children currently without homes, I'd like to know how many you have adopted yourself? How often do you volunteer at Big Brothers and Big Sisters? Are you a tutor helping foster kids achieve in school? How much do you contribute to charities whose sole purpose is to help these children find homes? Maybe you should consider turning your anger at abusers and murderers back to the real source. Fight against pornography, low moral standards, sex before marriage, children before marriage, homes without fathers, etc. and you will be fighting against the root of the problem. Advocating that a murder be committed to prevent another crime, well, that is just ludicrous.
12
June Stewart
January 28th, 2010 - 4:42:47 PM
I'm in agreement with Steve Morrison and L.Isom. I disagree completely with Stacey Morrison. I really get tired of opinions that hold onto what is on the TV and in the newspapers. When we start being in favor of any kind of murder, it becomes the responsibility of those that run their mouths just to hear themselves talk, and we all know what talk is. Do something to prove your point and stop talking about it. And at my age, I say, stay out of my shoes. I have too many examples I can give you re abused children and abortion. This young man is to be congratulated on what he's accomplished, but I really think he may be taking it a bit too far.
13
Alyssa Gooding
January 28th, 2010 - 5:17:30 PM
I think people who are anti-life should have their heads checked! CBS would do better if they aired this commercial, not worse. Thats my opinion. Take it as you will.
14
Elaine Gooding
January 28th, 2010 - 5:49:21 PM
I agree with Steve M. that the commercial should be shown, and if the baby-killers want to refute it, let them pay for their own commercial. Any comments about the Superbowl being "sacred" or "holy" are just ridiculous! Those anti-life folks just know what a big audience there will be for the Superbowl and are trying to squelch free speech.
15
Michael Hawk
January 28th, 2010 - 5:59:04 PM
Wow, this is an interesting talk back. Seems extremely one sided and I'm not here to change minds, but what I will point out is that when you start slinging terms like "anti-life" and "baby killer," you are emphasizing why a network or an activist organization would be weary about a commercial like this. It has nothing to do with the right to air it, it has to do with the decision if you want to take on the controversy and extremist attention (via both sides) that the ad will bring. Personally, at this point they shouldn't even air the thing cause they've already achieved more attention than they would from a mass of sports fans who could care less. Save some money and let's try and keep the debates intelligent and friendly.
16
Michael Arcand
January 28th, 2010 - 6:46:21 PM
Thanks for jumping in Mike with your thoughts. I think most people are missing the point. It all goes back to capitalism. CBS should air any commercial that isn't going against the FCC regs and doesn't present anything illegal. Focus on the Family wants to dish out $2.5M on a commercial sharing Tebow's story? So what? The sides on this issue will no doubt be reversed when people discover that CBS is also going to air a gay dating site commercial. I'm sure conservatives will come out of the woodwork against that one, and the liberals will support it. Look, it's America and we've all got the right to freedom of speech, AND freedom of our own opinions. Keep the discussion civil. After all, if we are forced into name-calling and degrading one another, what does that really say about us as human beings? Peace out.
17
Bonnie
February 5th, 2010 - 6:05:10 PM
If I have to watch GoDaddy.com commercials with my 5 year old on Super Bowl Sunday, I see no way someone could argue that a pro-life commercial is any more offensive.
18
Sara Welsh
February 5th, 2010 - 9:15:14 PM
Good point Bonnie!
19