Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

W,

Explain to me again why this is so offensive? And, explain to me how it is so pro-life? To me it is a vague, poor excuse for a pro-life message that wasted more than $2m dollars which could have been far better used supporting pro-life crisis pregnancy ministries.

Snickers did a better job with Betty White and Abe Vigoda.

L

Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

Lee,

I see what you're saying, actually. It is very tepid in the "message" department.

I don't really get the big deal either.

Rock on.

Wyman

Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

When I heard all the ridiculous outrage over this commercial it just made me shake my head. Apparently a "woman's right to choose" is more and more becoming an "ideology's right to determine what arguments a presumptively discerning woman shall be permitted to face". Pathetic.

Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

Well said Eugene. It is unreal.

Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

W,

PS: I'm all for making NOW mad whenever possible.

L

Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

Put me in the "I just don't get it" categorie. I just don't get what on earth is offensive about this commercial. My guess is that being produced by Focus On The Family is what really ticked off NOW.

Re: The 30 Seconds That Has Outraged the NOW

After seeing this, I'm pretty sure the people who made an uproar over this feel rather foolish. To be honest, it's so subtle that I wouldn't know what the ad was about if I hadn't heard about it beforehand.

One would think that advocates of choice would be all for an informed choice. ;)

Spencer