Gabriel Garnica
Tebow ad flap and result merely prove how pathetic pro-abortion groups are
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By Gabriel Garnica
February 8, 2010

All we heard amid the Super Bowl buildup is how the ad by Focus on The Family featuring Tim Tebow and his mother was an outrageous attempt to hijack America's showcase sporting event to push a political and religious agenda. Liberal mainstream media ( sorry for the unnecessary use of an adjective) outlets whined how this game was no place to jam a pro-life message down throats more interested in eating chips and salsa or cheering a favored team.

The Expected Flap

When the ad was originally announced, The National Organization of Women (NOW) declared it "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning" as well as citing CBS's decision to air the ad "appalling." In their usual relentless and despicable pattern of fanning flames for self-profit and publicity, both organizations wailed on and on about how this ad was a slap in the face to women everywhere and was nothing short of an abomination.

NOW president Terry O'Neill asked the public to let CBS know that "anti-abortion propaganda has no place in the Super Bowl or at major network offices" and Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards insisted that the "true meaning" of Pam Tebow's decision not to abort her son was that "a woman was presented with medical and moral considerations and made a deeply personal decision in private without government interference."

We should not be surprised to see these and other pro-abortion organizations go ballistic anytime anyone anywhere dares to even insinuate that a baby's life is more sacred than a woman's convenience, nor watch them twist this reality into yet another sad and feeble attempt to paint this issue as an assault on women everywhere. After all, do we really expect them to invite before and after images using sonograms and photographs of dismembered infants?

The Ad Itself

After all the hoopla, the ad America saw during the game featured Tebow's mother expressing how glad she was about the birth of her son and her decision to make that choice. It has been described as an ingenious low-key, under-stated soft-sell effort to have people check out the organization's ad for more on the story. At the end of the ad, Tebow tackles his mother in a light-hearted imitation of previous ads from the past. The ad never mentions abortion, nor does it in any way endorse or promote any position on this topic.

Of course, by now we should know that organizations like NOW and Planned Parenthood do not oppose such ads because of their content as much as because of their audacity to even faintly insinuate that a baby's birth should be celebrated, protected, or honored in any way. In their eyes, such a message is too dangerous to touch lest it should cost them a few bucks or tarnish their own twisted propaganda and lies. Remember, these are the same people who, with a straight face, tell us that defending abortion is honoring mothers on Mother's Day.

No Need To Enlist Pro-Life Views

Providing a litany of pro-life organizations or views to criticize the response of the pro-abortion lobby to this ad would be as impressive and persuasive as watching Gloria Steinem praise George Tiller as a saint for women. Little is proven by pointing to biased supporters of any position. No, for my money, much more can be gained by citing detractors from a side's own ranks to illustrate how pathetic and offensive that side's claims really are.

Despite describing herself as pro-choice and clearly not in agreement with Tim Tebow or Focus on the Family on many issues, Washington Post sports columnist Sally Jenkins wonders whether we should be more offended by the pathetic and arrogant attempts by groups such as NOW to censor any view, no matter how under-stated, counter to their own. Turning these group's own accusations around, Jenkins considers whether these people aren't the ones who are really offensive and demeaning to the public in general and women in particular by their suggestion that these issues does not merit discussion and that the Super Bowl audience is " too stupid or too disinterested to handle them on game day."

The Usual Pathetic Claim

It has become tradition for pro-abortion groups to complete their typical drivel with an absurd accusation or observation as the final cherry topping and their response to this ad was no exception. The Women's Media Center, which had objected to Focus on the Family advertising in the Super Bowl, said it was expecting a "benign" ad but not the humor. The group's president, Jehmu Greene, said Tebow tackling his mother showed an undercurrent of violence against women. "I think they're attempting to use humor as another tactic of hiding their message and fooling the American people," she said. With such a twisted and delusional take on reality, one would expect these groups to wonder if a team called the Saints defeating one called the Colts was not some sinister plot by Christians to dishonor animals.

I guess that Ms. Greene and her ilk believe that the ad where Betty White and Abe Vigoda were likewise tackled showed an undercurrent of violence against the elderly and the litany of suggestive ads featuring women as sex objects showed a respectful message honoring women. With such idiotic claims spewing from groups increasingly losing their grasp on reality, national relevance, and the views of most American women, it seems more likely that O'Neill, Richards, Greene and the organizations they represent are attempting to use censorship, arrogance, cowardice and blatant stupidity to hide their message and fool the American people they increasingly have no clue about.

© Gabriel Garnica

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)