GO TEBOW! America say's
pray for our country,pray for jobs, pray for the children of
Hati, pray for our children. Well guess what those children are the same children that could have never been!So thesse whiney women who are worried about this need to get over it and find something else to harp on. They will make their own choices regardless, but what Tebow is doing is great! He is showing the world how to stand up for what you believe in no different than what they are whinning about their choice. So leave him alone the Christians waiting to go home are proud of him and stand behind him, the rest well we can only pray they will find their way home with us when we leave.

I am glad that there will be a pro life message during the Super Bowl. Our country is losing so many good people to abortion.

This pretty much sums it up for me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAXCek6lAxI

I beleive the Ad should be aired. There is this thing called freedom of speech and it the ad offends you, well so what. The other side offend me quite often. What if their Mothers had decided they weren.t wanted. Oh God has the right to end a life. The BIBLE calls abortion a sin and that's the bottom line.

I seem to remember that those who advocate abortion stated they wanted it to be legal,safe and rare. At least polititians on their side stated that. So if they really want abortion to be rare, then they should favor an ad urging mothers to choose life.

Why the outcry from the Pro-Choice movement? After all it was Miss Tebow's "choice" to go through with the delivery. People still have the freedom to make that option. Don't we?

Baby killers are always "upset" if someone dares to air a pro-life ad "big time", e.g., during the Super Bowl. They are afraid that their dirty little secrets are going to be aired; and they are right.

If only Tebow and his mom had the grace to allow other women to make the choice that was right for those women and their families. The right to choose protects not only women who choose abortion by barring the government from banning abortion, but also protects women who want to give birth by barring the type of "one child" policy adopted by China.

BTW, what the opponents of this ad are complaining about (which CT totally ignores) is that CBS REJECTED an ad from the United Church of Christ a few years ago, claiming that it was "too controversial" because it spoke in favor of inclusiveness at church. Yes, CBS has a right to choose which ads to air, but when it had consistently rejected controversial ads in the past, for example rejecting BOTH the UCC ad and the Obama as a fetus ad, it now has apparently backed away from its formerly even-handed approach to now take sides.

Christian Lawyer, they're telling their opinion, not single-handedly banning abortion. They're not preventing women from making a choice. All they're doing is trying to convince women to think twice about getting one.

And as for CBS choosing sides, they haven't ruled out airing an ad for a gay dating site, so don't worry, you're precious liberal causes are still represented.

It's a bit ironic to see the anti-choice crowd try to claim that they're about choice. No, rightwing political organizations like Focus on the Family are not about choice at all -- they're still about attempting to deny all women the legal right to determine how to treat an unwanted pregnancy. No sugary mom-and-son ad can change that ugly fact.

But I doubt if there's too much to be worried about here. Fundie organizations tend to be both creatively or culturally challenged that it's a pretty sure thing this ad will be a top contender for 'Lowest-rated ad during Super Bowl broadcast'.

I think it's more ironic to see the "pro-choice" crowd trying to shut down all talk about the other choice. The solution to dealing with unwanted pregnancies is to not have sex if you don't want to get pregnant. If you're already pregnant but don't want to deal with a child, there's always the possibility of giving the baby up for adoption. I could give examples of health problems (physical and psychological) caused by abortion, examples of illegal activity by Planned Parenthood (without even mentioning the "fake pimp and prostitute" incidents), Bible verses against abortion, etc. Due to recent legal decisions against abortion, I could also go into how public opinion is turning pro-life. Just name your game.

Additionally, you have to wonder what sort of message Focus on the Family is attempting to send, and what kind of person would adopt the behavior they're advocating.

"You, too, can have a high-risk pregnancy in the Phillipines and then, against the advice of medical professionals, risk your life by carrying a potentially fatal pregnancy and then, unlike all the women who have died doing this, you could give birth to a baby who grows up to be a football player who paints his face with Scripture quotes." Is that what they're trying to say? I can't see a whole lotta women finding that prospect terribly appealing, but maybe there's a certain low-information, low-self-esteem demographic that FotF appeals to.

By the same token, without proper medical technology and expertise, an already high-risk abortion in the Phillipines would become even more dangerous. If you say that they could send people to the Phillipines to open an abortion clinic, that means that real doctors could also be sent to open a hospital with an obstetrician and proper childbirth facilities. Also, just curious, where in the world did the low self-esteem argument come from?

Oh yes, and high-risk pregnancies that could be fatal to the mother only make up 1% of all pregnancies.

@cybereagle777 could you link to the information you found that says only 1% of pregnancies? I am simply interested because I have actually not seen that before.

And to return to topic, I have no problem with this ad airing. While I am in the pro choice camp, I believe all sides should be fully represented. However, that's the problem - previous years have seen politically charged ads on both sides of the spectrum blocked. Why is this one different? I will be watching to see if the ad uses sound rhetoric and sparks intelligent debate, or if it falls into the propaganda trap. Too often on either side of the issue appeals are made to emotion rather than logic.

NJ Hansen, I'll try to find it somewhere. It's been a little while since I found this and have to track it down again.

NJ Hansen, apparently they changed the numbers since I last looked. Now, it's closer to 5%. Here's the link.

http://www.expectantmothersguide.com/library/stlouis/ESLhigh_risk.htm

Either way, that is a very low percentage compared to what many abortion groups claim.

I think it's terrible that NOW is protesting this, but ignoring the multitude of ads that portray women as sex objects.

Isn't their anger pointed in the wrong direction?

Read my post on this over at Red Letter Believers
http://www.redletterbelievers.com

Now that the ad has aired, I hope folks realize CBS had nothing to object to. They approved the script (perhaps without actually even seeing the advertisment); what's not to approve? How could a playful conversation between a mom and her son be objectionable, anyway.