Jump to content

Menu

NBC refuses to air a prolife ad during the super bowl.


Recommended Posts

I'm glad it is getting so much airtime on YouTube. I think it makes people uncomfortable, and I think that's a good thing. It was a beautiful ad, hitting to the core of the issue as it stands at this moment.

 

It's funny how censorship is applied by the majority, isn't it? Censorship is only evil if one's own position is the one censored.

 

 

Right on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

 

No, I can't. It is so obvious to me (note italics) that it's in poor taste, trying to explain my reaction is akin to trying to explain to you why the letters "c-a-t" represent the word "cat". There's nothing else to say. This is one of those subjects on which people either agree or disagree. I have no interest in trying to convince those who don't share my reaction.

 

Hmmm...that's interesting because I have exactly the opposite assessment. It's so tastefully done and spot on to me that I can't imagine seeing it any other way. Just perspective, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope they start running the ad regularly on all the channels. I don't care about the superbowl. It's a great commercial. It's not tasteless in any way.

 

The link was deleted, so I didn't see an article, but I have seen the commercial. If they only rejected it for the superbowl, I can understand the business behind that.

 

If the refuse to run it at all, that would seem to be censoring a viewpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did NBC take their money to do the ad and then back out/refuse?

If so, then I think they are in the wrong in every way.

 

If they simply refused from the start to run a CatholicVote ad, then I'm conflicted...

 

I do think a business should be allowed to refuse to serve in most situations. I don't think so in this situation though. Frankly, NBC has paid for the production of far worse shows and accepted payment for some pretty tasteless commercials, so I can't understand how they can honestly justify this decision. It smacks of anti-catholic/christian motives to just refuse an ad because it is by a religious organization or even because it is on moral topic.

 

The ad is very simply stating a fact.

When someone commits abortion, any possiblities for that little life is snuffed out. Whether that life could have been good or not will never be known because someone else felt they had the supposed right to decide a baby didn't deserve to live.

 

History is full of people/groups/gov'ts who felt they had that right. And every one of them are looked on today as atrocities. Why we can't see it as such when it's happening now is beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad it is getting so much airtime on YouTube. I think it makes people uncomfortable, and I think that's a good thing. It was a beautiful ad, hitting to the core of the issue as it stands at this moment.

 

It's funny how censorship is applied by the majority, isn't it? Censorship is only evil if one's own position is the one censored.

 

Is this censorship? For me, censorship has a governmental/legal component. Certainly, no one stopped the creation of the ad. And no one is saying the ad can't be shown. In fact, a lot of people have already seen it.

 

A business chose not to enter into a business agreement to run the ad for money. Did they do it because the management of the company is pro-choice? Because they personally found the ad to offensive despite being personally pro-life? Because they feared a negative response from other advertisers or from the NFL who awards them the rights to show the Superbowl? Because they feared a negative response from viewers?

 

I don't know. But it's their company and I certainly feel they have the right not to air the ad if they feel it will be bad for business or will cause a bigger headache than they think it is worth.

 

Now, you may decide to boycott/write/protest that business decision. If enough people do that, it might change their ad choices in the future. But I think they have the right to choose the ads they air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree:

 

 

 

 

Why is there a contridiction between Obama's life and his political position? Are you saying that Obama thinks all pregnant women should abort their babies if they are struggling and divorced? Really? Maybe that is what the ad wants you to take away from it, that according to Obama's political position, his mom should have aborted him. :confused: Obama is not saying all struggling families should abort their unborn. :eek:

 

His political position is that women should have the right to CHOOSE. Obviously, our parents chose to keep us, so we are all being contrary when we think other mothers should have the right to abort if they choose?

 

I don't even think the ad is fair in the fact that it made the Obama's seem as if they were destitute. They were not. The Obama's were married when Barrack was born. (young, but married) They divorced when he was 3 and his mom remarried when he was 6. His dad left and was never a part of Barack's life... I see no correlation between this and abortion.

 

No, your not seeing the point. The point is, what IF Barak's mom had aborted him for the same reasons that many women use to justify their decision. The point is that he himself is saying that it would have been Ok if his mom had made that decision and his own life was terminated. We are supposed to see what a tragedy that would have been for the world and how close we came to loosing someone so important to us all. And if it would have been a tragedy if Barak Obama had been aborted, why isn't it a tragedy when ANY child is aborted?? It's makes PERFECT sense! Amazing and Brilliant IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yahbut, they also banned the PETA ad. So, at least they're being fair and balanced in their ad-axing. :D

 

I think the NFL has a "no issue ads" policy. That would explain why both ads were nixed. They are a private company and should be able to show/ ban what they wish. That's what freedom is. I'm glad to know that they are consistent within their own policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

... If they only rejected it for the superbowl, I can understand the business behind that.

 

If the refuse to run it at all, that would seem to be censoring a viewpoint.

 

 

 

 

I thought the ad was really well done, not at all tasteless, and definitely not confrontational like many issue ads tend to be.

 

However, I have to agree with this assessment. If they rejected it simply for the Super Bowl, then OK, I understand, this is a business decision -- they'd rather not run an ad that might stir up controversy or be perceived as divisive. Not saying I agree with that decision, but I think they are within their rights to make that call. (I certainly hope I don't see other issue or political ads air during the Super Bowl, if this is their justification for refusing it.)

 

Now, if they reject it outright and refuse to run it ever, in any time slot... that's a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if we want to get technical about it, that's about to change. Under FOCA, Catholic and other conscientious (that is, private) hospitals would be forced to perform abortions. So there is a censorship that is government mandated, and this is one of the hot topics that the ad addresses.

 

It isn't surprising that NBC didn't want the ad. They represent the majority, who elected the president who favors abortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if it would have been a tragedy if Barak Obama had been aborted, why isn't it a tragedy when ANY child is aborted?? It's makes PERFECT sense! Amazing and Brilliant IMO

 

I think its a stretch to say Obama could've been aborted. She was young, married and had Obama with her husband. He left when Obama was 3 and his mother remarried when he was 6. I don't get why the ad would infer that it would be a tragedy if he had been aborted. It makes it seem that his mother was a perfect candidate for abortion, which I would disagree with. Abortion is more complicated than that.

 

 

 

I don't think there are many cases where abortion should be considered. I am Catholic, fwiw, and I wouldn't abort a baby and I can only think of a few cases where I think an abortion would be an acceptable choice, but I think a mother has a right to choose her own path, even if I think it's wrong.

 

I am happy that Barack Obama's mother had the CHOICE to keep him or abort him and I am thrilled that she chose to keep him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, I can't. It is so obvious to me (note italics) that it's in poor taste, trying to explain my reaction is akin to trying to explain to you why the letters "c-a-t" represent the word "cat". There's nothing else to say. This is one of those subjects on which people either agree or disagree. I have no interest in trying to convince those who don't share my reaction.

 

And trying to explain to you why your condescending tone sets my teeth on edge is like trying to reason with a 3-year-old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...