Editor’s note: This is about sports and politics. If you don’t want to be offended by a political discussion then skip this post. You’ve been warned.
Politics is funny. Politicians and political activists will say anything—even if it isn’t true. Case in point: Tim Tebow’s Super Bowl ad. According to an AP story (read it embedded below this commentary), women’s groups are furious that someone might have a prolife message and a compelling spokesman against abortion.
“An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year — an event designed to bring Americans together,” said Jehmu Greene, president of the New York-based Women’s Media Center.
Feel free to laugh. The Super Bowl isn’t designed to “bring Americans together” as this delusional woman thinks. The Super Bowl was designed to make money.
And to make buckets of it.
It is anathema to some, but for most of America money is a good thing. We buy big televisions and big SUVs in an effort to pollute and cause global warming—and who wouldn’t like a little global warming considering how cold this winter has been? But that is a topic for another day (and I probably should write it soon since all that global warming evidence is evaporating fast these days thanks to all the revelations that researchers were committing fraud and using faked data.)
Tebow had this to stay about his Super Bowl ad and stance on abortion, “I know some people won’t agree with it, but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe. I’ve always been very convicted of it (his views on abortion) because that’s the reason I’m here, because my mom was a very courageous woman. So any way that I could help, I would do it.”
While I know a few Georgia fans that wish Tebow had been aborted, the attempt to muzzle Tebow’s viewpoint is a despicable action from liberals—who should be more committed than anyone to allowing free speech. Well, that is if liberals followed the principles they pretend to embrace.
But some of the statements from liberal organizations in the Tebow case are just absurd. Like this from the National Organization of Women. “That’s not being respectful of other people’s lives,” said Terry O’Neill, the president of the National Organization for Women. “It is offensive to hold one way out as being a superior way over everybody else’s.”
Some ways are superior to others. The choice to rob a bank is morally wrong. The choice to give to charity and feed the hungry is morally good. I suspect NOW believes a country that is prochoice is morally superior to a country that does not have such a policy. That is a moral judgment; it is an assertion that one way is better than another. Can’t liberals be consistent about anything?
In a free society we need these types of discussions. Why is it that liberals want to deny Tim Tebow a platform for sharing his thoughts? Are liberals afraid their positions can’t stand up to that test?
You can read the entire AP story embedded below: