http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/29/news/co
So an ad about a dating service is too controversial because it's involves gay men but an ad that suggests that women who have abortions are horrible murderers whose children would have all grown up to be super star football players is just fine? This is a fucked up country.
Right-wingers are all up in arms with false indignation because they claim that pro-choice people are attacking this ad for no reason. Nobody cares that this woman took considerable risk upon herself, with very little chance of success or survival for her or her son. That was her choice, we're all pro-choice. The problem comes when you air an ad designed to suggest that all women should take that same risk upon themselves. She got lucky but what they don't acknowledge is that millions of women would die (along with their fetuses) if abortion wasn't an option. No doubt many women have died because they were convinced that God wanted them to go through with the hopeless pregnancy. They can dress it up whatever way they want, this isn't some feel good ad about a happy family, it's an attack on every women who has made that difficult choice.
I wouldn't have so much of a problem with the ad if they hadn't denied the dating site ad, or if there weren't a long history of rejecting "controversial" Super Bowl ads (only, it seems, when they're liberal ads). The fact that they're essentially saying that Focus on the Family's hate group money is greener than the dating site's money is the major problem. The anti-gay bias involved in this decision becomes even clearer when you look at the Snicker's ad from last year with the two men inadvertently kissing because of a Snicker's bar and then going to elaborate ends to beat the shit out of each other. I guess it's ok to show two men getting close as long as there's some sort of violence involved so the kids don't forget that being gay is a horrible, horrible thing. We'd hate for them to learn tolerance after all.
