….and you’re a Chicago Sun-Times subscriber……well, anyway, let’s get to the point.
The editors put their agenda out there in the commentary announcing their ’staunch pro-choice’ views and determination to work to keep laws in place making abortion accessible.
The post below explains.
But let’s carry that argument through to its logical conclusion.
The Sun-Times editors say this:
The Chicago Sun-Times is a staunchly pro-choice paper. Abortion is legal in this country and we’ll do everything we can to keep it that way.
Startling enough for a metropolitan newspaper, even a bankrupt one still publishing. The ideological position, as said below, is pretty ‘out there’. But the commitment to activist advocacy for a highly controversial moral issue and social policy, on the part of a newspaper, is just fringe.
But, the paper professes to believe passionately in free speech, and therefore declares its willingness to accept the Super Bowl commercial that – hasn’t generated but – is getting a lot of controversy.
The ad stars Tim Tebow, college football’s biggest star, and his mother. They’re expected to recount the mom’s decision to follow through with the risky pregnancy that produced her Heisman Trophy-winning son, despite advice by doctors to terminate.
We probably won’t like the ad, but that doesn’t mean it should not air — so long as differing views are also welcome on CBS’ airwaves.”
Monica takes issue with that, continuing the conversation in the post below, in which I said the editorial was odd, and disturbing in a paper’s admission of such advocacy.
“It is odd – and why don’t they explain themselves when they say we probably won’t like the message . . . or at least, continue their thought, because it leads us to believe that thought is, “We wish Pam Tebow had aborted, but since she didn’t she should just shut up already!”
Good point. That’s exactly what they’re saying, whether they’ve thought it through or not.