Tebow to appear in Focus on the Family commercial during SB XLIV

Mount Cody's bitch

 

Well done. I'm guessing Derek supports forced procreation for all women.

 

A person exercising a right to not have sex is not the same as a person actively destroying a life that is already in existence, however.

 

ahhh, there it is.

 

Hate to have to say this since he hates me and we became Best Board Enemies a few weeks ago, but Point of Order's posts on this page are Hall of Fame-worthy. Good stuff, seeing logic tear apart a clueless know-it-all.

 

Behold, the power of Tebow.

 

Apparently I do to, since I'm with BYH on this.

 

It's far from settled that that's an actual life, tho. That's why abortion is legal.

 

Although I'm basically agnostic, the semi-hostility and snearing directed toward Tebow in relation to this commercial honestly baffles me.

We are, for the most part, journalists. People often try to suppress our right to say unpopular things and, when they do, we typically band together to protect their right to speak, regardless of the topic. Although I don't honestly believe anyone is trying to prevent Tebow from speaking, the negative emotion here clearly makes it clear the folks expressing it would prefer he didn't speak.

I honestly don't get that.

 

That's begging the question. The question isn't whether they are morally the same, the question is whether they are *logically* the same. They are, and it proves your "absurdity" assertion false.

Whether or not abortion is morally allowable, your argument about mothers exercising it is logically invalid.

 

Maybe I wasn't as clear either. The point I was trying to make is that there are several provisions in the Old Testament that are no longer followed... I seem to recall one directing us to not have any dealings with a menstruating woman. Who gets to decide which parts of the Bible are still in effect, and which aren't?

And Jesus did put a different spin on it ... the whole "turn the other cheek" thing. Given that, how can any true follower of Christ support the death penalty?

 

Threadjack from the current line of discussion and forgive me if this was brought up in the previous 10 pages, but do we know for sure that the NFL is accepting this ad? And if so, why? The NFL and CBS have rejected MoveOn and PETA ads in the past. Wouldn't this carry the same threat of being overly political?

That AP story doesn't quote the NFL or CBS. It only says the ad has been shot and the funds have been raised. I could see it being a publicity stunt like so many other "Super Bowl ads" of the past.