Comments on: The Unspeakable: Why Can’t A Billboard Say Obama Is “Pro-Abortion”?

By: civil_truth

civil_truth — Sun, 10 May 2009 04:50:38 +0000

…of the top of my head. I probably could come up with others if I took more time.

1) The owners had a personal objection to the message because of their convictions on the abortion issue (pro-abortion) and/or support for Obama, and so wanted to craft the message in a weaker form that would still pass muster with the buyers.

2) The owners did not want to risk displeasure of other advertisers.

3) The owners wanted to minimize a possible public controversy so as not to get drawn into it, which would be a losing situation for them regardless.

By: WarEagle01

WarEagle01 — Sun, 10 May 2009 04:41:23 +0000

By: WarEagle01

WarEagle01 — Sun, 10 May 2009 04:39:20 +0000

Why in the heck would the sign company care?

By: JoeG

JoeG — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:32:21 +0000

Could fix that sign real quick.

By: lkdavis

lkdavis — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:16:37 +0000

we also have the option of not giving them our business.

By: aesthete

aesthete — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:09:23 +0000

“No one wants to see slavery expanded, and the tired rhetoric from both sides is not what the American people want. To that end, I will not only make slavery safe, legal and rare by upholding the plantation owner’s right to choose, but I will also increase government funding for slavers, will prohibit merchants from pointing out the moral and long-term economic pitfalls of slavery, and will increase funding for slavery around the world.”

Isn’t that such a reasonable position?

By: leftylurker

leftylurker — Fri, 08 May 2009 00:47:31 +0000

On Kos, fwiw, even the Vatican thinks that all the outrage over this is politics.

By: DONTREADONME

DONTREADONME — Fri, 08 May 2009 00:36:19 +0000

the person was a black man and the business owner was a white man? I agree with you that this is a private business matter, but the hypocracy in this country usually shifts the argument depending on the purchasee’s minority status. Again, I agree with you this is a private business.

By: jabley

jabley — Fri, 08 May 2009 00:30:35 +0000

It would bother me more if a private business was forced to put up any billboard someone brought their way. They have a right to have content guidelines, just like RedState/Eagle Interactive does (and which they clearly define on their advertising materials. Private business. Their choice. End of story.
===========
From Eagle Interactive
All web banner, dedicated e-mail and e-newsletter text advertising creative is subject to Eagle Interactive approval. Eagle Interactive reserves the right to reject or cancel any Advertisement, Insertion Order, and space reservation or position commitment at any time based upon its creative content or otherwise. Eagle Interactive has the right to refuse any content that is defamatory, racist, sexist or discriminatory to any social or religious group at its discretion. Eagle Interactive has the right to refuse any content that is sexually explicit in nature, that contains reference to bodily functions, that condones illegal actions, that contains violence, that advertises any male enhancement products or advertises HGH (human growth hormone). Eagle Interactive also reserves the right to refuse any advertisement(s) with content that we determine to be unacceptable to our audience.

By: Lammo

Lammo — Fri, 08 May 2009 00:06:50 +0000

darn computer.

By: Lammo

Lammo — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:58:46 +0000

in my city, which is about three times the size, there’s only one billboard company so there would be no where else to go.

By: Lammo

Lammo — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:53:43 +0000

scattered around the country. The Cardinal Newman Society publishes an annual guide to authentically Catholic colleges and universities. The list, which currently consists of 21 schools, can be found here: http://www.catholichighered.org/TheNewmanGuide/tabid/356/Default.aspx

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:37:40 +0000

universities in the US
There must be 10?

but see my comments on the culture war and you will see that I think we are saying the same thing

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law–Politics-Examiner~y2009m4d25-Culture-battles-lost-despite-not-because-of-Dobson-and-Reagan

By: izoneguy

izoneguy — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:20:31 +0000

Legacy, schmegacy….

By: LJ "Beaglescout" Miller

LJ "Beaglescout" Miller — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:11:03 +0000

Because that is what it is. The tribe owns everything, and lends it to the people of the tribe to be caretakers. Their produce is given to the tribe, and they get a small piece back. When they hunt it is given to the tribe. Nobody, except the chief, can accumulate any property. In a defacto sense everything belongs to the chief and the council of elders, including the lives and labor of the tribe. And that’s exactly the same thing as socialism. Just change the name of the chief to the secretary and the council of elders to the socialist party. The misery and poverty are the same. Caveman economics, as proposed by Marx.

By: ExposeDemLiars

ExposeDemLiars — Thu, 07 May 2009 21:03:11 +0000

Opposing abortion is simply defending the rights of the innocent. How can there be room to allow each individual the “choice” of recognizing those rights or not?

To say “I’m not pro-abortion, I’m pro-choice, each woman should decide for herself”
is no different than saying
“I’m not pro-slavery, I’m pro-choice. Each plantation owner should decide for themself.”

By: ExposeDemLiars

ExposeDemLiars — Thu, 07 May 2009 20:57:04 +0000

The liberals have taken the high ground by using “perception” words. We need to counter that by making them look foolish whenever they do. That’s easily done by asking questions that put the word back in context. For instance whenever a liberal calls themselves progressive, ask them
What is “progressive” about regressing back into Totalitarianism?
Or if they call someone a homophobe, reply by stating that phobia implies fear and we are not afraid of discussing our position, are they?
When they blame Bush for starting the bailout spending, remind them that Obama has been in office for 5 months. If he were a leader he would have corrected the direction.
In other “words”, we need to use their own words to show a clear and distinct difference between us and them.

By: ExposeDemLiars

ExposeDemLiars — Thu, 07 May 2009 20:55:36 +0000

If there’s a choice, then the only civilized choice is to outlaw it.

By: Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin — Thu, 07 May 2009 20:17:33 +0000

It’s not censorship, per se. But that doesn’t make it above criticism.

The fact that they were unwilling to print those particular words is telling.

By: LibRick

LibRick — Thu, 07 May 2009 20:06:38 +0000

Shouldn’t the required text have been stated in their RFP or more likely RFQ (on this level) ?

And, doesn’t a private business have the freedom to propose, modify requirements and submit a bid according to it’s own interests?

The Pro Life Action League could have rejected the contract and went elsewhere, and maybe they should have.