Tim Tebow Shoots Super Bowl Ad for Anti-Gay Focus on the Family


Tim Tebow, the University of Florida quarterback known to inscribe Bible verses into his eye black, has shot a commercial for anti-gay Christian group Focus on the Family set to air during the Super Bowl. The likely message of the ad, which he shot with his mother, is anti-abortion:

"Pam Tebow contacted amoebic dysentery while on a Philippines mission, and the bacterial infection sent her into a coma. Upon recovery, doctors urged Pam to have an abortion because of the damage to her body. Tebow was born healthy on Aug. 14, 1987…
Jim Daly, Focus on the Family president and chief executive officer, said in a statement that the Tebows’ message about family comes at the right moment in the culture because 'families need to be inspired.'

The commercial was shot in Orlando. 'Tim and Pam share our respect for life and our passion for helping families thrive,' Daly said. 'Focus on the Family is about … strengthening families by empowering them with the tools they need to live lives rooted in morals and values.'

Super Bowl ads are expected to run around $2.8 million dollars for the 100 million viewers. But the Tebows produce financial draw."

Focus on the Family donated $727,000 to the Proposition 8 campaign to ban same-sex marriage in California. Its founder, James Dobson, has been outspoken against gay issues, most recently the federal hate crimes bill.

The ad is the first Super Bowl ad in FoF's history.


  1. Mike says

    The point all these folks are missing is that abortion is a personal choice. It’s great their story turned out this way, but it could have just as easily turned out very very bad. Bottom line, they should stop trying to impose their beliefs on others. What is wrong with these people?

  2. Cory says

    Didn’t the NFL reject an anti-bush ad from Moveon to air during the superbowl a couple years ago because they said they don’t allow advocacy during the game?


  3. rwvaughn says

    Damn! I wish this bigoted hypocrite would have his embarrassing Jimmy Swagart moment sooner rather than later so that he can proclaim to all who idolize him that he has sinned and beg forgiveness.

    The sooner it happens the sooner we can forget one more phony.

  4. peterparker says

    While I strongly disagree with his position on the subject, I have very little problem with Tim Tebow shooting an ad to advocate for the anti-choice position–everyone is entitled to an opinion after all. The problem is that he partnered with Focus On The Family. *That* is the truly disgusting part of this story.

  5. James says

    If somebody wants to pay to put the story of my poor son, that lived through 14 days of pain and hell only to die, I can show these people the other side of the story. If I knew he would be born with a disease that no child has ever survived early in the pregnancy would we have had an abortion and saved him, our family and our surrogates family all that pain? Hell yes.

    Fuck these people and their lucky story. Where was their loving god in our circumstance? Nobody wants abortion, but to abolish it is to deny the intellectual core of our humanity.

  6. Tim says

    And he wears a purity ring. Really? A virgin? When he gets drafted maybe it be to a city above the mason dixon line so he can learn a thing or two about the real world.

  7. says

    HEY! Focus on Family. How about you spend that $2.8 million dollars HELPING families in need???

    Aside from my constant rant about the money they could be spending on the needy, what’s their target audience with the Super Bowl ad? People who get drunk watching the game, hook up with their girlfriend (or their friend’s girlfriend), then get her pregnant and not have an abortion because they saw this ad?

  8. Bill says

    If they want to waste a couple of million dollars on this dribble, I say more power to them. At least they’re not using it for something more insidious.

  9. Scott says

    Its even worse, Cory, they rejected an ad from the Unitarian Church once that *gasp* showed a gay couple being accepted into a religious organization.

    They only reject political ads that will upset the fundies.

  10. GrabbinNewscume says

    If they ever actually do find a genetic cause for homosexuality, and expectant parents start aborting fetuses that test positive for the “gay gene”, how much you want to bet a lot of gay people start becoming “pro life.”

  11. niles says

    Okay, he and his birth mother have chosen sides. They have chosen to help fund one of the most heinous and hateful organizations in America that wants you all dead. Oh, but so what he’s hot, right?

  12. Bill says

    I’m pro-life. I’m glad he is too. People need to prepare for pregnancies and not kill fetuses on whim or because they can’t handle what they created. However, I don’t support his decision to align with FoF.

  13. says

    Bill, the same people who want to control what women do with their bodies want to control what we do with our bodies. Women don’t “kill fetuses on whim.” Only a gay man who has never spoken with a woman who’s had an abortion could say such a ludicrous thing. FOF wants to inflict their personal beliefs on everyone–being anti-choice and being anti-gay go hand in hand.

  14. ty says

    Blake you are a desperate street whore if you find this guy attractive. And Bill, if men could get pregnant would you still be pro life?
    Misogynistic gays, who knew?

  15. Blake says

    Oh please bitches, don’t be actin’ all prim and proper, you would go down faster than a drunken preacher’s daughter on prom night if you so much as shook his hand.

  16. TANK says

    Oh, misogynistic gays exist. I detest them. The ones that tell fat jokes about their fag hags behind their backs? I’ve got no time for those predictably disappointing people. Who ever thought they’d answer their mother with, “I want to be a common slob”. They are men, after all. And men are pigs. That’s a fact of biology. Pigs. But so is everyone else; women, too. Don’t ever forget it, because if you do, you’ll get hurt. But getting hurt reminds you that you’re alive, and only once. What’s worth saving? I love it all, from genocide to geraniums. There’s beauty if everything…from a homeless alcoholic pissing himself in the cold to a breathtaking vista.

  17. Marie in SF says

    So PeterParker, In your mind it’s okay if this creepy closet case discriminates against women, but it’s not okay if he discriminates against “gays” which translates to gay men in your world.

    Dude, I know you from the craigslist forums and again, all I can say is, “WHAT???”

    You come from a very priveleged background. You’re gay. Both of those things are true about me as well. But I don’t hate women. You do, and it sort of taints everything else you say.

    Drop the hate bro. It makes your ass look fat.

  18. Liz says

    Isn’t it odd that FoF has purchased commercial space during the Super Bowl to discuss abortion? It doesn’t seem like an appropriate audience given the material.

    Also, as a scientist, I have to point out to the Orlando Sentinel that AMOEBIC dysentery is caused by a type of AMOEBA, not bacteria, but I digress…

  19. says

    There is no reason why the gay marriage TV ads from “Get To Know Us First” were banned from being aired during the Superbowl last year while an ad from Focus On The Family focusing on abortion would be allowed this year. That is blatant discrimination.

  20. THE QUEEN says

    simply gorgeous, i’d love to do him on the 50 yard line, him and his buddies, slapping me with their jockstraps as they commit all kinds of indencencies with my person.

  21. TheNiebur says

    Blake, just because you meet all your friends in parks & public toilets, doesn’t mean that all gay people think with their dicks, or need last resorts to hook up with someone…

  22. says

    This caught my eye and made me think:

    “If they ever actually do find a genetic cause for homosexuality, and expectant parents start aborting fetuses that test positive for the “gay gene”, how much you want to bet a lot of gay people start becoming “pro life.””

    Posted by: GrabbinNewscume

    I sat and thought to myself, “would I be so strongly pro-choice if unborn babies were being killed left and right because parents could identify the Gay gene?”

    I don’t know, anybody else have an opinion?

  23. ron says

    There’s nothing more hateful than leftists. Leftists murder babies then scream more hatred towards those opposed to murdering babies. Just read these comments.

  24. John says


    Pro-choice should not be conflated with pro-abortion.

    I think if we had licensed doctors and therapists presenting mothers with the facts about sexual orientation, most of them will make an appropriate decision. Most women do not take the decision to have an abortion lightly any way. It is usually an emotionally draining and difficult process. But if women can only have abortions for reasons I personally approved of, then it wouldn’t be a “choice” anymore, would it?

    It would be government sanctioned “family planning” of the sort they have in the People’s Republic of China. That’s an entirely different conversation. And fortunately, it is one that we don’t have to deal with in this country yet because we still have the resources to feed our people. But I am sympathetic to the harsh realities of ruling an empire of that magnitude. If we ever reach the point where we are struggling to feed 1.5 or 2 billion folks, “choice” might become a luxury we can no longer afford.

  25. Jason says

    And this a big deal why? It’s football the typical strait guys beer chugging yell at the TV screen testosterone filled sport. Think of the people FOF are marketing to. There’s your answer.

    And I think that money could have been spent on the victims of Haiti. But then again I’m a Gay Christian and well I guess my opinion doesn’t matter right Dobson?

  26. nic says

    there but for the grace of god go the tebows. god smote between 100,000 to 200,000 dark-skinned people in haiti, just so the Lilly-white tebows could live in comfort and promote their idiocy. the entire world will spend 100s of millions of dollars to rescue the buried-alive, the sick and the dying in Haiti, while these sick mother-fuckers promote their cause. protect the unborn? sure. fuck the living.

    the loony pat robertson blames the haitian’s misery on allegedly turning their backs on god. the bloated, oxycontin-addled, drug addicted, pork-fed carcass of a man(?) stinking up the highways and byways of our political landscape, says obama’s response to OUR massive military, public and private, and humanitarian aid to Haiti is a political ploy. and, the right rejoices. the milk of human kindness extends only to their own gaping maws. fuck christ, this is the start of an election year.

    god is indeed great, and god is indeed good. he let’s the bigots prosper, while he fucks the destitute. this is god in a bizzarro world.

  27. gleeindc says

    Back in 2005 NBC and CBS refused to run ads about the United Church of Christ’s welcoming of LGBT worshipers because the ads implied criticism of other churches’ positions on Gays. How is this Focus on the Family ad any different?

  28. DR says

    I remember many of you drooling over him when Andy posted the shirtless pics of him. How quickly allegiances change.

    I am going to reserve judgment on Tim’s views until I see the ad. But if it is a pro-life ad, considering his mother was told by doctors to abort him due to the risk to her life, and considering that she didn’t and produced this young man, I’m not going to complain at all.

    If he were a gay athlete, out and proud, you’d all be encouraging him to do ads for our cuase. But because he’s a devout Christian who may appear in a pro-life ad he’s now public enemy number one?

    I may not agree with his message (although I suspect my views on abortion are probably closer to his that many of yours), I support his right to express it.

  29. says

    I can appreciate the fact that Tebow has a beautiful body without forgetting his alliance with reprehensible Christian fundamentalism. The two do not have to be mutually exclusive. Serial killers can be physically handsome sometimes too, but that doesn’t mean we’re all signing up to support them.

    Also, some here are citing the story of Tebow’s mother’s pregnancy and the recommendations by her doctors to terminate it as evidence against abortion. The fact that Tebow was born healthy is wonderful, but the decision for a mother of four small children to proceed with a very risky pregnancy in a foreign country against medical advice still represents an unreasonably dangerous course of action that could easily have resulted in an unspeakable tragedy for their family. Any competent risk/benefit analysis at that time would have pointed to this same conclusion. Tebow’s mother’s story had a happy ending, but should not be regarded as a model for others in similar situations.

  30. crispy says

    Hey Derek,
    Ever seen the movie Gattaca? It deals with the exact ethical question you posed. A gay gene isn’t discussed per se in the movie though it is briefly mentioned on the DVD’s extended scenes.

    I doubt that the identification of a gay gene will lead to abort-or-not decisions. However, I do fully believe, like Gattaca proposed, that parents will one day be able to choose to keep or eliminate genetic markers at the point of conception. A lot less messy than abortion.

    And you just know the fundies will find a way to maintain their strict anti-abortion stance yet have no problem whatsoever manipulating the ethical bounds of eugenics to suit their beliefs.

  31. says

    I wonder if Tebow will ever just come out. When I see him, I think of the Wizard of Oz, “Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain.” In this case, it’s “don’t see me for what I really am.” He puts on a show, making sure the camera’s on him on the sidelines while he makes a big show of praying, the bible verses under his eyes, making sure the camera’s on him, again, after the SEC champ game while he tries to squirt some tears. Someone who puts on that big of a show is hiding something. We’ll likely never know what that something is till after he dies and his “personal assistant” writes a tell-all book about their long-term affair, but the more he does these things, the more I want to know what he doesn’t want people to know.

  32. Rowan says

    @ Crispy

    Well said.

    That’s what people don’t get about the right and the fundies, they twist everything to suit their warped purposes and call it ‘freedom’!

    How is pro choice being anti-life?

    How many of these mental fundies are really and truly great parents? Really care about their kids and let them be WHO they are instead of what THEY want them to be?

    A genuine and true parent?

    If more people had abortions instead of having kids, than the world would be a better place.

    I’m fed up to the back of my teeth of dealing with effed up kids who never had parents there for them, who left to rot in the system, who grow up so messed up because of abuse or who grow up knowing that they are not wanted but that they are tolerated because some self righteous b*tch didn’t want to ‘abort’ her kid.


  33. ndorphynbear says

    Being Pro-Life is not Necessarily Anti-Gay.
    When the reason for same-sex attraction is discovered which babies are going to be first place on the hit list?

  34. JohninBR says

    First off, I wish Tebow hadn’t joined up with Focus on the Family, an organization that I think does harm to many families and groups…not just gays.

    However, his views on abortion mirror my own. I have yet to have anyone tell me when life begins. Without that knowledge, I err on the side of caution and am strictly pro-life. The same way I err on the side of caution in regard to the death penalty. What if someone is incorrectly sentenced? That is why I am anti-death penalty.

    On the other hand, if you are going to be strictly pro-life, you must be at the forefront in encouraging adoption and services for pregnant women. I have donated time and money to various local organizations that provide such services. You must also push for legislation that makes it much easier to adopt and include all types of families in that. This is where most of the far right falls down.

    And yes, seeing him in person, Tebow is very hot.

  35. steve04074 says

    I’ve been astounded for months now at the number of gay guys salivating over Tebow at another website devoted to gays&sports…. The signs have been there all along (Good Lord, people, look at the Bible verses under his eyes…) that he’s hard-core fundamentalist, along with the rest of his family. How pathetic to be lusting after someone who, to your face, I am sure would tell you that you are going straight to Hell for being gay.

  36. DR says

    Actually, Milkman, I 100% disagree. I think his mother was very brave in that she was willing to do what she needed to give birth to a child. Why do we always have to assume the worst? Clearly doctors are not infallible, as Tim’s case shows. Why should we “err on the side of caution” and stop a human life before it’s had a chance to be born?

  37. says

    DR, because there were five existing lives already depending upon the continued health of the mother. Don’t get me wrong, I understand why she chose to go ahead, and am glad it turned out well. But in the case of all medical evidence pointing toward a tragic end to the pregnancy, for both the child and the mother, I fail to see the logic in allowing it to continue. Doctors don’t need to be infallible to offer advice based on the best available medical evidence. Indeed, that’s all anyone can do in any situation.

    Even hard core pro-lifers concede that termination of a pregnancy is reasonable in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Mrs. Tebow’s decision was indeed brave, but sometimes bravery can be tainted with myopia and selfishness.

  38. heather says

    wow you guys must have a lot of time on your hands to talk all of this crap about tim tebow and his mother doing this ad. Personally i think that this is a great idea because tim has so many fans and that he has the opportunity to talk to people about what he belives is great. Not alot of people would ever do something like this because they would be scared of there reputation being ruined but it takes a real man to do this. GOD BLESS Tim Tebow

  39. Rowan says

    @ johninbr

    “I’m fed up to the back of my teeth of dealing with effed up kids who never had parents there for them, who left to rot in the system, who grow up so messed up because of abuse or who grow up knowing that they are not wanted but that they are tolerated because some self righteous b*tch didn’t want to ‘abort’ her kid.”

    So what are your feelings on the above? And what are you doing to support abused kids, orphans and kids in care?

    People whose parents had no right having them but like you, they didn’t believe in abortions.

  40. Jon says

    As Blake, The Queen, DR et al have sadly shown, there are still many gay guys for whom straight masculine worship trumps critical thinking. For some gays, Tebow could come right out and say he hates gays and they’d STILL want to bury their faces in his buffalo ass (in fact, it would probably turn them on more). See also: Brady Quinn.

  41. JohninBR says

    “So what are your feelings on the above? And what are you doing to support abused kids, orphans and kids in care?

    People whose parents had no right having them but like you, they didn’t believe in abortions.”

    I don’t believe in sacrificing a possible life (again, I don’t know when life begins) to make it easier for the rest of us, because some of us are “fed up.” If you are fed up, do something about it.

    I believe I said that I have donated time and money to organizations that support expecting mothers. I also have served as a CASA and donated to the local Children’s Advocacy Center.

    What do you mean that they had “no right” to have children? Everyone has the right to have children. Is it wise for some to? No. However, everyone has a right to have children.

  42. GrabbinNewscume says

    >>How much do you want to bet a lot of christian conservatives start becoming pro-abortion far faster? You simpleminded trolling shitbag.Posted by: Blake | Jan 16, 2010 10:03:34 PM

    Oopsey – guess I hit a nerve, Blakey. You cuntlicking dolt.

  43. John says

    – See also: Brady Quinn.

    Not to mention Tom Brady.

    And for the older children, there was Brett Favre and Joe Montana.

    If you are Republican, Christian, and a jock – you can get away with pretty much anything, including violent behavior, as far as the conservative gays are concerned. That is, unless you are also black. Then all bets are off and they’ll damn you to the everlasting fires of Hell for uttering anything even remotely homophobic.

  44. Steve says

    Does anyone have any suggestions re: whom to contact at CBS to protest this situation and be heard? Reading this, I was disappointed by their decision to air the ad but appalled by the information in the comments about denying pro-equality ads (assuming it’s accurate). Let’s be proactive about this. Any shows we could boycott?

  45. peterparker says

    @MARIE IN SF: How *dare* you accuse me of being a misogynist! I am anything but misogynistic, and there is *nothing* in my post that even hints at a hatred of women on my part.

    Read my post again, MARIE IN SF:

    I begin by stating “While I strongly disagree with his position…”. How many misogynists would take the same position on abortion that I take, MARIE IN SF? Answer: Not many! The fact of the matter is that I think Tim Tebow’s position on the issue of abortion is barbaric, short-sighted, ignorant and ultimately harmful to millions of people–primarily women and children–around the globe.

    If anything, my post was simply a nod to Tim Tebow’s freedom to believe whatever fucked up, ridiculous, delusional, hurtful thing he wants to believe, an acknowledgement of his right to advocate for his position and a slam of his choice to partner with Focus On The Family which I regard as a hate group. Unfortunately, freedom of speech is a two way street and requires that we tolerate the pontifications of religious zealots like Tim Tebow, Pat Robertson, et. al…otherwise we risk having our speech suppressed.

    MARIE IN SF…when George W Bush was installed in his first term as President of the United States, his first official act was to cut off any federal funding for family planning organizations overseas that offered abortion counseling. This meant poor, largely powerless women in developing nations were left with fewer resources to safely terminate a pregnancy. I found that action reprehensible and protested by donating money to Planned Parenthood in George W. Bush’s name. I have participated in pro-choice rallies. I once took a friend to have an abortion and later took care of her because her sack of shit boyfriend who got her pregnant would not take the day off of work to be with her. And finally, when I think back on all the friends I’ve ever had throughout my life, about 75% of the ones to whom I felt the most emotionally close were women. Don’t you dare accuse me of hating women. It is an inaccurate charge, and one I find deeply offensive.

  46. peterparker says

    One more thing, MARIE IN SF: if Tim Tebow decided to shoot an ad that was anti marriage equality, I would think that he was ignorant and most likely homophobic. But I would support not only his right to believe that marriage should be available only to heterosexual couples but also his right to advocate for his belief. I think people should be allowed to believe anything they believe and to discuss those beliefs freely. After all, it helps us identify the haters.

    Where I draw the line is when people try to interfere with the human rights and civil rights of others by enshrining discrimination and oppression into the law. While Tim Tebow’s position on abortion (and most likely just about any other issue) is abhorrent to me, I recognize that he has every right to those beliefs.

  47. TANK says

    ew, peepee’s blathering. Peepee splutters and splashes. Yeah, this is another “I disagree with what you say, sir, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it…” idiot soap boxing for idiots to belch up their nonunderstanding. This isn’t about free speech, idiots (not just you, peepee).

  48. Jon says

    I agree Tank, and note how much more likely the “right to free speech” defense crops up — and how much more emphatically it is applied — if the person being defended is a white, straight, masculine jock.

  49. Bosie says

    Who cares?* THIS very site will be publishing “hot” guys in their undies JUST because their hot….So really at the end even though thtye tell us these bad “news” the gay brain is short in memory and if they see someone hot regardless if they killed or hate gays they will post him ‘cuz he’s “hot”.

    SAD SAD SAD that my own people will settle for less as long as they are “hot”

  50. Javier says

    As a prolife Democrat who also respects people with different convictions that I have, I salute Tim Tebow for sharing his powerful story in a manner that encourages, not forces, others to do likewise. By all accounts of those who know him, Tim Tebow is the real deal, a dude who truly loves Jesus Christ and seeks to serve people through everyday acts. Whatever you may think of him, he genuinely loves God and cares for people. While I would prefer he not work with a rightwing organization like Family Research Council, in this case, his message of choosing life over abortion is one I wholeheartedly applaud.

  51. TANK says

    And does anyone really want to argue antichoice vs. prochoice, i.e., the abortion debate? I will bury you. The best argument you have is logical vagueness, and it’s piss poor. If you attribute personhood (the ability to THINK/speak and have goals that are as of yet unrealized) to a blastocyst or sperm…as vagueness does dictate (it’s all arbitrary stipulation, I think…sorites paradoxes), then you have a pretty PISS POOR opinion of people. And MORESO, can’t distinguish between a person and a hen…LOL! If you eat meat, then you’re killing people in light of your criteria.

    So you can applaud this fucking DOUCHEBAG ASSHOLE WHO WOULD DO THE WORLD A SERVICE BY KILLING HIMSELF for inflicting his ANTICHOICE/antifreedom VIEWS (you fucking misogynistic self loathing HOMOSEXUALS–if ever there was an oxymoron, it’s that), because you are admitting that hens and ants are PERSONS. You have no credibility. And moreso, you DON’T MATTER, BECAUSE ABORTION IS HERE TO STAY FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD, FUCKHEADS. YOU LOST. SUCK IT!

  52. Capt W says

    Gosh, lloks like I no longer have a need to watch the Super Bowl….or perchase any of the products replecated from any of the affiliated sponsors, But that is just me, anyone else care to join???

  53. Frozen North says

    Is the guy actually anti-gay? I haven’t read anything about it.

    Abortion-rights and Gay-rights aren’t the same issue. Though we often line up on the same side. There are plenty of “pro-life” gays out there (who aren’t even Republican!)

    Also, not everyone knows the whole story to Focus on the Family. As gays, we’re obviously very tuned in to their anti-gay message. But as a str8 guy, why or how would he know about it?

    All he probably knows is that some wealthy and influential groups wants to run an ad against abortion, which apparently is something he’s on board with.

    I’ll give the benefit of the doubt until I see him in a NOM or FotF anti-gay ad or interview.

    (Oh, and if you’ve seen one, post it please.)

  54. says

    “Abortion-rights and Gay-rights aren’t the same issue.”

    No, they aren’t the same issue, but many comments here are missing the obvious overlaps. Anti-choice people want to inflict their personal beliefs on everyone and prevent anyone who doesn’t share those beliefs from having control of their own lives and bodies. Anti-gay people have the same objective. It’s no coincidence that most anti-choice people are also anti-gay.

    Why men, whether they be Tim Tebow (not that it matters, but didn’t find him hot before, now, or ever) or some gay guys who’ve never had to worry about pregnancy in their lives, think they have the right to tell women what to do with their bodies is beyond me. His mother exercised her choice not to have an abortion. She stood by her own morals, good for her. Other women should have the right to make a different choice.

  55. says

    I’m not sure I buy into the whole freedom of expression argument. Not when your expression is corporate funded by $2.8 million. How much must you hate gay people to spend that much to express it? It’s sickening. I know some of you are just trying to be cute by excusing him because he’s hot, but put your ding dongs away for a few seconds and think about how much harm stuff like this really causes.

  56. Nick says

    Little timmy tebow just cannot stop prostheletizing-whether it is wearing bible verse references on the grease paint under his eyes to telling anyone within shouting distance what a devout Xtian he is-
    If your gawd is calling you timmy-why are you
    going pro and making the megabucks –what would your jezzzus do?
    And why are we still listening to me in regards to abortion? If men could get pregnant -abortion wouldn’t be an issue.

    The NFL is permeated by born again christians- who prostheletize left and right on and off the field. Wonder how Muslim members of the teams are accomodated?

  57. CKNJ says

    Anyone have teh contact info to give CBS and the NFL hell for their hypocrisy? Not allowing gay-friendly ads because it was ‘advocacy’ but allowing this douchebag and his family to blather their advocacy all over viewers? We need to give those fuckers hell! Stand up against the Christian Taliban (they are, after all, simply the Christian version of those evil fuckers in the Middle East, making them AS evil!!)

  58. Ryan says

    I don’t understand the connection or the anger. I am a gay man, fiercely fighting for gay-rights, but also I don’t believe that abortion right.

    What’s the connection?

  59. TANK says

    The connection between gay rights and reproductive rights is that being antichoice is restricting a woman’s freedoms by enforcing gender norms (turning beliefs about how men and women should behave into law). This restriction on a woman’s freedom will just result in more dead women who will seek abortions through other means (as they did when abortion was illegal), and devalues the life of women by preferencing the life of non-persons (fetuses that are not conscious) above people like women, who are. So that enforces a belief that their life isn’t as important as the potential life of something that isn’t conscious, and moreso, isn’t a person–as they would no longer have the choice to carry the fetus to term. The belief that women do not have reproductive freedom over their bodies is a product of sexism, wherever its foundation occurs (whether religious or secular). Not having that freedom over their bodies reduces women to the property of the state (explicitly, property does not have freedom of choice, whether it’s animate or inanimate); and in this case, those who hold the most privilege are men, who would be making that decision as they did to legalize it (re: gender composition of the supreme court during roe and doe). That is, the group that, overall, holds the most social privilege (i.e., have the most options in life compared to other groups) in a given social arrangement determines the rules that everyone else plays by.

    Now for the connection. Without sexism, homophobia would not exist. Sexism occurs when people act outside of the gender norms set by those who have the most social privilege and are able to enforce them because of that privilege–heterosexual men. Obviously, gay people exist outside of gender normativity, because they have sex with those of the same sex, when the gender norm stipulates that they SHOULD have sex with members of the opposite sex (it’s not a statistical norm, but a prescriptive norm, hence the word “normativity”). Restricting women’s rights enforces those norms, and enforcement of those gender norms means that gay people have less of a chance of achieving legal equality overall because they exist outside of it. Why? Because those norms are strengthened.

    Of course there are gay men who don’t understand feminism…or homophobia…or social rights…or anything. Then there are those who do, and yet are still misgynistic and work against themselves and others like them by, say, advocating for the antichoice position. You have a right to do that in the united states, and you are free to hate yourself as well (however implicitly). Just stay as far away from the gay rights movement as you possibly can, please. Sexist/homophobic gay men are not needed nor wanted. They are best ignored, and universally.

  60. Ryan says

    It took you too many words to insult me. I’d prefer less reading and time-wasting to realize that you are bashing on me in the last sentence. I am not homophobic or misogynist or gay-hating. In fact, I showed that to everybody I work with and they had the same question, “What do they have in common?”

    And for abortion, I agree it saves women’s lives, but nobody says that it’s the only way. I would be all for state-sponsored sterilization or birth-control.

    In fact, abortion and gay-rights are at odds with each other in at least one aspect. One issue is arguing for a way to make a more legitimate and stable relationship (can you tell which one that is? hint: it’s not abortion). The other is typically used in scenarios where men and women are promiscuous, however I will concede that if you don’t feel like raising a human who is gonna be disabled, why limit abortion to just inter-gestational?

    Those who have the misfortune of having to deal with one of those severely disabled humans who will never attain as high a level of consciousness as we have should therefore allowed to be killed any time during its life.

  61. TANK says

    “And for abortion, I agree it saves women’s lives, but nobody says that it’s the only way. I would be all for state-sponsored sterilization or birth-control.”

    And for those who are raped and don’t want a parasite gestating in their womb, those methods wouldn’t work. Those methods don’t address the issue of a compromised pregnancy in which the mother will die unless the fetus is aborted. But why state sponsored sterilization? That’s rather extreme, and you know who’s going to be on the short end of the stick there, don’t you? Poor people and minorities. I guess it really comes down to a breakdown in understanding that wealthy people are a product not of themselves, but of the society (laws and conventions) that encouraged and enabled them to accumulate wealth, and pure chance of birth.

    But what kind of metric would you be using for those who would be eligible for sterilization? Sterilization is for life: you are ending someone’s right to procreate forever; whereas abortion can be situational. Birth control doesn’t always work. I personally don’t think that abortion should be used as a method of birth control, but when talking about moral reasoning, ethics and practical ethics, your personal tastes are simply immaterial to reasoning through the right course of action; specifically, a woman’s right to choose to terminate her pregnancy outweighs the suffering and death of women caused by its prohibition.

    To the connection, however, you do realize that gay rights movement only got off of the ground because the women’s liberation movement gained significant traction in the seventies, right? Without that breakdown in the gender binary fostered by the women’s liberation movement (i.e., that women could be more than the possessions of their husbands, fathers, etc), the gay rights movement would not have benefited and achieved what it has to date. This is not a coincidence, as homophobia is a byproduct of sexism. We wouldn’t be having any of these conversations hadn’t the female liberation movement progressed. And the women’s rights movement got off the ground largely because of people like Harry Blackmun–that is, heterosexual men who were willing to see beyond their prejudices and upbringings and fight against the privilege and chauvinism that men had been taking advantage for centuries–and still do as sexism does still exist. Of course Harry Blackmun and men like him had daughters, and they wanted to have a better quality of life.

    “One issue is arguing for a way to make a more legitimate and stable relationship (can you tell which one that is? hint: it’s not abortion).”

    THey aren’t at odds with each other, though. Marriage is no longer about raising children. People who have no desire for children get married; those who cannot have children marry; people who don’t love each other get married…who don’t even like each other get married (my parents, for example). The stability or lack thereof of a marriage is founded on neither the ability nor intention of having children, and hasn’t been in the united states ever insofar as those who had no desire or ability to bear children could participate in the institution. Instead, the stability of relationships in regard to marriage is a commitment between two people who want to share their lives with each other, and express that love through a contract that enforces the responsiblities that both desire to have for each other. That is what marriage is about–not procreation. Therefore, insisting that a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion is in opposition to advocating for the stability of same sex relationships in marriage or marriage in general is a nonstarter–a nonsequitur.

    And now you’re bringing up logical vagueness to argue against the right to choose. I think what distinguishes a person from a non-person is in part psychological consciousness–the ability to think and communicate. Another thing, however, is the ability to have goals for the future and go about satisfying them; to have preferences. Neither of these conditions is satisfied by a fetus. But, the argument goes, it can be. So we’re dealing with potentiality. But to be consistent, you should also be against anyone who has casual sex, same sex sex, or uses a condom, has no intention to procreate, or masturbates–for in all of those cases, we’re dealing with potential persons that are being denied their “right to life”. I doubt you are, so why in the case of the fetus who is per argument merely a potential person, too?

    To address the last point about retroactive abortions or euthanizing certain humans because they don’t have the ability to lead a life worth living, I don’t have a problem with that. It’s not merely about being alive, for bacteria are alive. So few antichoicers get that. It’s having a life worth living. If a human is born without the ability to satisfy any of its preferences or even have preferences to satisfy due to genetic defects and severe handicap, and lives in unbearable agony until its death, that human simply lacks a life worth living. THe resources required to keep that person alive, living a life not worth living takes away from the resources of someone else who does have the ability to lead a life worth living, too. Now there are a lot of different ways to lead a life worth living, but some birth defects and accidents preclude that possibility.

  62. Jon says

    Relax, ladies. Sure, Focus On The Family hates “us”, but getting your Calvin Klein micro-fiber trunks in a bunch over his ad and jumping on the “I Hate Tebow” bandwagon is a little extreme. Yes, he filmed a spot for a group that is biased against gays. But his spot isn’t about denouncing gays or their lifestyle…it is about being PRO-LIFE. Instead of complaining about how much money was wasted and how it could’ve been put to better use…AND wasting your time and energy HERE…volunteer or something. Be productive.. Make better use of YOUR time.

  63. autumnleaves says

    Shouldn’t he be allowed to have his opinion too? So often the world points fingers at Christians saying that they are intolerable and closed-minded. Aren’t Christians entitled to their opinions and beliefs too? You ask Christians to keep their opinions and morals to themselves and to stop “preaching” to everyone else. Why then, are you allowed to proclaim your opinions and morals on everyone else? Why is it that when a gay-rights organization puts a commercial on tv, its seen as being open minded and understanding of equality, but when a Christian organization puts a commercial on tv its seen as being closed-minded and unaccepting? Not a rant, just a thought.

  64. michael says

    he may be good looking but hes fucking ugly on the inside period. Its time for people to wake up to these lies like the stereotypical bullshit Christian garbage about : not agreeing with what we do or how we live but that they still love us . HAHAHA sorry couldnt help it thats the same thing as saying well I think you’re disgusting and the way you are life but I and my imaginary friend still love you!:) Preposterous.

    Tim knows what he’s doing he probably even knows that Focus on the Family are extremely bigoted towards gay americans he’s not a supporter so hot or not in my eyes anyways he’s just another person thats part of the problem in this country not part of the solution period.

  65. HW says

    1. There are an awful lot of clones posting lately. Andy, have you looked into this?

    2. Replying to Autumnleaves, this is what I have to say, as a black man, when people cast ads to restrict equality from whoever (reproductive equality in this instance), its literally the same as refusing equality to people of a different race/identity or non-violent lifestyle.

    You wouldn’t like it if radical Muslims put up on ad on the superbowl to restrict all Christian women’s right to reproduce. Why would you support a Christian’s ad to restrict every woman from having a choice in whether she has a child or not?

  66. Jessica says

    Let not politicize the Super Bowl, we’re waiting for the games. Tim has the right to do commercials, why he’s to be blamed. go ahead Tim. for SuperBowl, I already hd my tix from Ticketsinventory.com and I’m waiting impatiently. can’t wait! oh my god!

  67. Jeff says

    All these comments are ridiculous. Just because he believes differently than you (and I – I am for womens choice) it doesn’t make him a bad person. Just like you have a choice to voice your opinion. I do have to say I know he would never make the comments about your beliefs that were made here, because he is a christian as am I. We have different beliefs about abortion, and thats ok. People to make comments about him being a virgin and other things just point out what kind of people you are, and believe me as a christian it is not my place to judge him or you. I do however believe that many people are just jealous that he has such a great life, and is such a devoted christian and their lives are screwed up with issues and other things that they only way they can feel good is to put him down.

    Again while I disagree with his position, I have no problem with him promoting it.

    If you want why dont you promote the other side instead of taking shots at a geninuely good human being who just trys to help whoever he comes in contact with.

    I honestly believe if a woman was choosing an abortion and he had a chance to talk to her he would tell her his side, but in the end leave at peace and let her make her own decision.


  68. CHris says

    And you wonder why so many people want to just beat the living crap out of you gay sick bastards.

    I don’t want to sterotype because while I am straight I do know some quality individuals who are gay.

    But it is the same thing I see in all aspects of life, while you cant sterotype across the board the village idiots are the ones who stand out, as it is with everyone who is just a bad person of character and quality. Maybe if more of the good gay people stood up and wouldn’t let the low lifes shape the model for them many more people could accept them. It is the way it was for African – Americans many years ago, most people only saw and heard of the ones in the ghettos killing, stealing, raping and other things, while there where probably 85 – 95 pct good people who never got noticed. This is the same thing I see here, a bunch of sick perverted gays, who have nothing better to do in their lifes. All they want is to persecute other people rather than try to make their lifes better and show a quality side of gay individuals. It just disgust me to see some of the sick post about such a warm and christian man who has done many things for others.

  69. TANK says

    Shut the fuck up, chris. You stupid fuckin’ asshole. It’s retards like you that lower the bar for discourse. There’s nothing there…you’re a stupid fuckin’ void.

  70. John G says

    Most of the people here are really something. You talk about choosing which I agree on it’s your choice of WHEN you’re making your choice that is laughable. Make your choice BEFORE you do the act to conceive. Try not to shed your responsibility off as most of you are with your comments here. Be responsible for your actions. GO TIM TEBOW !!!

  71. Michelle says

    Soddom, Gamorra, Pompei. And, you still think that there is no punishment for your sins?

    I think it ironic that many of you call others who believe in God, “a**h****, f***-ups, retards, stupid, etc, etc.; yet it is you who do not have the wisdom to use better language or the ability to post a decent comment.

  72. Rick says

    I think some people on here just don’t quite get “gay humor”. I suspect that there are women out there that find this guy very attractive physically but are appalled by his right-wing Christian views. As a gay man I find him attractive but only in the physical sense!

  73. Pete says

    My poor family is suffering because some gay strangers that have nothing to do with my family chose to be gay and desire to get married. My family will now suffer and break apart. Damn you homosexuals. *end sarcasm*

Leave A Reply