The Jesusback Commercial Destined to Reignite the Culture Wars (And the Snack Chip Crusades)
01.29.10Here it is, everybody – the never before seen Focus on the Family ad airing during Super Bowl XLIV that features Tim Tebow decrying the evils of smishsmorshions. I can’t wait for Tostitos to counter during the Oscars with an ad that has Ricky Stanzi calling for a flat tax.
And, as a chaser for all that tasty fundamentalism, here’s the actual commercial submitted by the gay dating site ManCrunch.com that CBS is trying to quietly decline without pissing off the Human Rights Campaign too badly. Even if they’re better off without another representation of homosexuality as bizarre and disturbing, err, I mean, HURRR LOOGIT DEM QUEERS PAWIN’ AT ONE ANOTHER! UNNATURAL AND SICKENIN’ IS WHAT IT IS!
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/global/images/default-avatar.jpg){kind=avatar}
![[image]](http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/02/selena-gomez-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/02/stickyrickyretirement-150x150.jpg)
Hi, I can understand how to add your site in my rss reader. Can you Help me, please :)
my God, i thought you were going to chip in with some decisive insght at the end there, not leave it with
@clayton:
I do so want to stab myself for doing this but…
+1 to the dude
@Matt T.
Thanks, I’ll take that under advisement… “El duderino”.
@ Clayton – Just fucked myself – was very fun. DEFINITELY GETTING AN ABORTION THOUGH LOLzzzz.
If you have to discuss hot political topics with no right answer on a forum such as this, I guess I just don’t understand the audience you are trying to reach. But, if you, and anyone else needs to, get into the brevity thing and keep it short.
Boys have penises girls have vaginas.
@Matt T.
Go fuck yourself. A bit selective with the commenter criticism, aren’t we? My first response was brief & simply questioned what the big deal was about one ad telling a specific story. All posts thereafter were responses to someone else’s criticism of my posts. If you would have invited Filth Nasty to also die a miserable death, then maybe I would have just accepted & agreed with your point that a football/dick joke site is not the proper forum for this discussion. However, I too love football & dick jokes as much as anyone else on here, so pardon me if I object to it all being in good fun as long we’re just ridiculing one side of a given argument when slightly off-topic issues are mentioned.
Dear Clayton,
You really have picked an interesting forum to discuss these issues. Are you for fucking real? Go to another website.
Please die you miserable bastard.
“That commercial needs George Takei to come out of nowhere and say “Oh my” after the two guys start kissing.”
HHHHHHHAAAAAAAA
Not sure which part you believe is “speculation”, but I assure you that- even if “a vast majority” have no problem conceiving- there are still plenty of candidates that would love to have the oppportunity to adopt. I have one cousin that spent tens of thousands of dollars on fertility assistance to no avail before attempting to adopt. After much research, several attempts, & a few years, they eventually adopted twin girls from China (& it wasn’t until he got a promotion that gave him a prominent title that his application there was given serious consideration). I have another cousin- whose husband was already snipped- that wound up adopting from Kazakhstan (have fun spell-checking that for your “sic.” label, professor) after getting frustrated with attempts here. One of my best friends is unable to conceive, and is well into their 2nd year of waiting for potential children to adopt. If your problem with the pulled portion of my previous comment is my description of the U.S. adoption process, I must say that is somewhat confusing since you later agree that the adoption process needs a major overhaul. If your only objection is my “fabricated figures”, then give me a small fucking break… this may come as a shock to you, but when I visit my favorite football/dick joke site & I feel compelled to comment on something, I don’t spend hours doing research so that I can cite sources or have footnotes to support my position in what amounts to an inconsequential argument with strangers. If it makes you feel good about yourself though, then here: yes, you caught me, I made up my “figures” & I can’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that “5 times” is demonstrably accurate… well done, sir! That being said, I don’t think that it would be far-fetched to say (without looking it up… ) that there are waiting lists at every single adoption agency & many adoptive parent candidates that will never get their chance to expand their family.
I actually believe that it is neither dishonest nor partisan to suggest that the “pro-choice” arguments lack emotional persuasiveness. I suppose everyone reacts emotionally to different things in different ways, but I’m gonna go out on a limb here & declare that most people would have a greater emotional reaction to hearing that a baby (or “fetus”, though you never hear someone mourning the loss of their “fetus” when they have a miscarriage) was killed (or “removed”, “eliminated”, or whatever their humane term is this week) than they would about a woman being inconvenienced (&, regardless of NOW, NARAL & the like “dishonestly” making it seem like every abortion is either the result of a rape/incest or necessary to save the life of the mother, somewhere in the neighborhood of 99% of all abortions in the U.S. are obtained due to inconveniences of varying degrees). Clearly the preceding sentence was peppered with plenty of partisan commentary, but what was conveyed outside of the parenthesis would be difficult to argue with (I happen to be against gay marriage- & for civil unions- but I would have to admit that the pro-gay marriage argument of “equal rights for all” would probably be more emotionally persuasive than arguments for “protecting the sacred institution of marriage” if I didn’t already have strong convictions on the subject). Speaking of partisanship, if you object to the exclusion of nuance & subtlety, perhaps the finger should be pointed in the direction of those that declare issues such as parental notification & limiting “partial birth abortion” (or, really anything that can be even remotely linked to abortion) as an assault on women’s rights. Just saying.
Finally, while I understand and appreciate your position & what you have based it upon, I respectfully disagree based upon the means by which this issue has been “decided” in our country. Had the Supreme Court passed the issue back down to the states to decide for themselves (a decision that wouldn’t have required nearly as creative of an “interpretation” of the Constitution), then “choice” would truly be evident. I believe the procedure should be illegal except in cases of rape, incest, & when the life of the mother is in danger… but if a majority of my fellow Ohioans (or even elected representatives of my fellow voters) disagreed with that position, I could stomach it much easier than I can for 9 appointed people to have decided such a contentious issue. Unfortunately, judicial activism isn’t going away & every landmark decision from here on out will be based upon nothing more than which party holds the Presidency whenever a justice dies or retires… just like our founders intended!
As long as his idea of marriage involves women staying in the kitchen (WHERE THEY BELONG!), then I’m okay with it!
“As far as the millions of unwanted children around the world, there are probably 5 times as many sets of parents that either can’t- or don’t want to- conceive that would love to have ANY baby, but it is an extremely difficult, time consuming, & expensive process to adopt these days unless you are a celebrity or filthy rich.”
Well said nonsense, speculation, and fabricated figures. For the vast majority, having babies is not difficult–raising them is. I have no emotional or knee-jerk problem with a pro-life approach, but it is not realistic, and, believe it or not, is not a black and white issue. Only fools look tough and take a black/white position. Nuance and subtlety are marks of an educated discussion. It is unfortunate that people with strong opinions are painted in a negative way, but only because they generally appear to have lost their reason and are ideological. I am for what works, with as little government intervention as possible, including making things “illegal” as a blanket solution.
Considering how polarized the debate is, describing pro-choice not being “emotionally persuavive (sic.)” is quite frankly dishonest and partisan. I guess for me it comes down to core values of federalism and fostering a self-regulated society to have “choice”. I support the “choice” to be made as early as possible, with informed consent, and I agree the adoption process needs major overhaul. I also understand that individual opinions mean little, but considering you really just make things up I could not resist responding. Good day.
So Favre did the Vikings like a Viking? Nice
Bigsby:
Well said. Except I would counter your “it’s much easier to advance statements like “don’t kill babies” or “kill less babies” than it is to say “personally I’m against the procedure, but let other women choose for themselves”.”
On the contrary, I think it’s much easier to take the latter stance, because it feels properly “nuanced,” allows you to feel like the big boy in the room, yet still avoids confronting the issue. Tougher to simply come out and say “it’s always wrong.” Not necessarily “righter,” mind you, but in an important way, tougher.
@Clayton
Needed to be said.
Also, where were these women’s organizations when GoDaddy.com was (from their point of view) ‘debasing women as sex objects’?
(Finds it much more hilarious that NOW and company think the Super Bowl is a time where Americans unite.)
Setting aside the fact that Tebow is, as I suspected, a Dominionist bitch, it’s my policy to hope Tebow dies in a fire anyway.
In fact, if the rest of Hogtown, too.
Tebow’s inevitable NFL failure will be delicious. The Jets aren’t dirty enough, so I’m hoping the Ratbirds get the first crack at him.
Joe Buck was disgusted by that ad. And secretly engorged.
@ Clayton
SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!
/saved some people the effort.
@ Filth Nasty
The problem with the “pro-choice” advocates is that they don’t really have a compelling or emotionally persuavive means of convincing people that are not already squarely on their side. Your hypothetical example would have an enormous potential (I’d say about 99-100%) of back-firing since- as strange as it seems- it’s much more difficult to declare that someone shouldn’t exist (particularly based simply upon the inconvenience that they represent to others) once they are born. Let’s face it, it’s much easier to advance statements like “don’t kill babies” or “kill less babies” than it is to say “personally I’m against the procedure, but let other women choose for themselves”. That is why the “pro-choice” strategy is to paint every “pro-life” person as a hateful extremist & to limit as much as possible any information or deterrents to those who may be inclined to have the procedure done (doctors giving information on potential problems or emotional distress that may result from having the fetus destroyed? ZOMG, why don’t they just take away women’s suffrage too?!?). As far as the millions of unwanted children around the world, there are probably 5 times as many sets of parents that either can’t- or don’t want to- conceive that would love to have ANY baby, but it is an extremely difficult, time consuming, & expensive process to adopt these days unless you are a celebrity or filthy rich.
@Handle: There you go.
http://deadspin.com/5459870/dear-bill-simmons-please-stop-feeling-my-pain-for-me
According to Leviticus, those guys are in real trouble.
“‘Keep my decrees:
‘Do not mate different kinds of animals.
‘Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.
‘Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.” (19:19)
Did that mancrunch commercial imply an extremely awkward new set of football watching rules that suggestion whenever your rival team scores on you that your friend gets to score WITH you? Unless there isn’t alcohol, I’m not fond of this new kinky trend.
“That commercial needs George Takei to come out of nowhere and say “Oh my” after the two guys start kissing. That would have been awesome.”
copy/pasted for double-exposure.
Yes. Yes. YES.
Clayton,
Lionel Hutz told me that hearsay is a type of evidence, but it’s not good evidence. Regardless, by that reasoning you wouldn’t fuss about a commercial about a choice that turned out badly, like how a mother and her child’s life are ruined (not to mention a drain on society and our precious tax dollars) because the child was unwanted. Oh wait, just read the news about millions of unwanted children around the world.
I, however, have A Modest Proposal…
“@Nate…get better gay friends…”
Aww, but they’re great guys. Besides, I’m not fucking ‘em, what do I care? I’m just a stickler for stereotype adherence.
/tries to dunk a basketball, scrapes bottom of net
That ManCrunch commercial CAN’T be real… can it? I would’ve assumed that such a ridiculous ad would actually offend homosexuals that might be watching, but I suppose I’d have to defer to Manginos for that insight.
As for the Focus on the Family ad, from what I’ve heard it’s just the story of Timmy’s mommy making her CHOICE to protect the child that was growing inside of her… not sure why all the fuss. All of the “pro-choice” organizations- that have given this ad much more attention than it would’ve received had they just let it go- are constantly claiming they’re not “pro-abortion” & that they believe the procedure should be “rare but legal”… so what’s so dangerous about a commercial that shows an example of a choice that turned out well (his mother must think so at least)? I mean, I haven’t seen it, but I kind of doubt CBS would’ve approved an ad with the message of “You’ll go to hell if you don’t agree with us… now go blow up a clinic in your neighborhood!”
HURRR LOOGIT DEM QUEERS PAWIN’ AT ONE ANOTHER! UNNATURAL AND SICKENIN’ IS WHAT IT IS!
So I’m not the only one fired up for the Larry the Cable Guy special on Sunday?
Somewhere Gus Johnson is saying “Pause”
@Handle: If you piss off the Queer Mafioso by requesting a PK-like skewering of Simmons every Friday, thus ruining our sexy Friday, I will gouge out your eyeballs and piss on your brain. And by that I mean shake a virtual fist at you in a menacing kind of way.
How about Po’BoSas?
That’s when you blend up a po’boy with orange juice and champagne, right? Damn, I love New Orleans.
How about Po’BoSas?
@Nate…get better gay friends…
“No, no, not like a fag. Like a viking!”
“I’d like to put a big red chiffon dress on you and ride you around my house. Not in a gay way. Like a viking. Like only two vikings who are so secure in their Norse heritage that they could ride up and down the steps and not have one twinge of homosexual panic. Do you see it? Like with me holding the horns of your metal helmut? … That don’t make me gay or nothing, right?”
–Dom Irrera
*Gay guys
I’ll tell ya what I hate about the gay community:
Guy gays are stereotypically neat and thin but most of my gay friends are fat.
FIX YO STEREOTYPE!
“reignite the culture wars”
Wait, they were extinguished? more like “pour gasoline on” or “chuck a phosphorus grenade into”
One too many “displays” in there. Literacy would be helpful…
A conversation I once overheard:
“So I got this guy bent over and I’m fucking him-”
“You fucked a guy? That’s so gay.”
“No, no, not like a fag. Like a viking!”
The gay ad isn’t political; it’s just fucking stupid, and trying to be controversial, stir the pot a bit. Some Fat Hump is not gonna put down his cream puff, wipe the bacon crumbs off his Battleship Manning jersey, and decide, “Time to admit I’m a gay, now where can I find a fellow four hundred pound fat hump queer?” After seeing this shit. And the number of gays who will be watching is minimal – let’s put it this way, I’m gay, and will be watching the game with straight friends. There might have been a short viewership spike for the Prince halftime show a couple years back, but that’s about it.
So the ad is basically the one thing I hate about “my community,” which is their propensity to poke people in the eyes, or just make you all gouge ‘em out yourselves with really unnecessary imagery. I apologize for that, I guess.
As for Jesusback, go fuck yourself. He has every right to his opinion, I have every right to say he’s a turdbucket who uses his collegiate stardom to force his views upon good people and sausage-fingered Fat Humps alike.
Can’t we all just forget the politics and get along?
…Except for Indianapolis. Seriously, this shit display this city is putting on display makes me ashamed to be a goddamned American.
My work firewall blocked the focus on the family commercial but played the Mancrunch commercial.
“The one time I hang out with crackers…”
This, and every Friday, I am going to renew my request that BDD breakdown the new Simmons column PK style. I can’t bring myself to contribute another page hit to his infuriating popularity but I really want to mock his ceaseless self-contradiction.
/used to like his columns and feels ashamed
@Tracer,
Maybe Lance will provide that friction you have been sorely lacking.
At least we can agree this will be the only time Tebow is shown on SuperBowl Sunday….AMIRITE???!
isn’t ManCrunch the new Pringles flavor? I saw Sarah Silverman pee into a can of these.
I don’t know how he did it, but the guy in the Adrian Peterson jersey managed to fumble a cock
Good point, Jerk. (That didn’t come out right.) CBS should run both ads. After a week, no one will give a shit, Focus on the Family won’t get to indulge their neverending sense of persecution and I’ll have a date with Lance.
@ LT’s
100% right. I think its pretty obvious that a website called mancruch.com doesn’t have (or need) 3 million dollars to buy a super bowl slot.
Everyone who doesn’t like the ad (myself included): ignore it. I mean that, I really do. The ad itself is incidental. The content is barely relevant. In the end it could be 30 seconds of Tebow knitting and the effect would be the same. This “ad” was made for one reason: to get attention for Focus on the Family. They want this “controversy”. They crave it. They bathe themselves in it. They need your disdain in order to feel relevant and righteous. And deep down inside, they WANT this ad to be pulled. They want to portray themselves as the poor, persecuted outcasts who are better than everyone else because of their holiness.
However, if they were to run this Doritos ad in that spot, I would stand up and applaud.
They gonna runa a NAMBLA ad too?.
/quietly vomits
There’s no way Drew is the pitcher or catcher in that commercial because his asshole is constantly chafed and brown from pooping and he’s probably empty of sperm from too much masturbating.
You know, UU appeared to be rather obsessed with that Man Crush advert. Is that where you met Drew?
CBS is okay with making your dick hard for hours with a pill, as long as it stays away from a manhole.
That commercial is really bad, but I totally cracked up at the song.
Both commercials should run back-to-back. Sort of like a semi-queer masturbatory session.
@ Ryno
I don’t begrudge them their choice in ads. They gotta get paid. I hate them for most of their choices in programming. And announcers. And analysts. And their refusal to switch away from blowouts to more interesting games. And… well pretty much everything they do.
Someone should tell Tebow that homosexuals don’t have abortions.
Judging by the amount spent to produce that commercial, I’m pretty sure they were planning on shooting for free publicity.
I predict that when Tebow gets to the NFL he’s going to wish that a lot of defenders’ mothers had made a different choice during their pregnancies.
At what point does the anger shift from Tebow/mancrunch and focus on CBS for its choices in advertisements?
@NNv, literally.
I eagerly await the Funyun/NORML ad myself.
I like my beer cold, my tv loud, and my Super Bowl commercial flamming!
That black guy wants in!
AJ Hawk and Purple Jesus should be ashamed of themselves for allowing them jerseys to be worn by gays for ManCrunch.
@UU
if it had a mustache, it was trying to be ironic, of which sarcasm is a signature symptom.
These two ads combine the best of Peter King’s worlds.
That commercial needs George Takei to come out of nowhere and say “Oh my” after the two guys start kissing. That would have been awesome.
I’m surprised Packers Gay Dude and Vikings Gay Dude weren’t both wearing their #4 Favre jerseys.
I’m Tim Tebow and I say, abortions are wrong. Put that baby up for adoption, but don’t let a gay adopt it, that’s wrong too. Better yet, just don’t have sex. Betterer yet, don’t have sex, set fire to a Planned Parenthood, read the bible, and spit on jews. Now, who wants to buy wire hangers in bulk?
Jesusback: Your 2011 UFL MVP…and 2012 Cashier of the Year at Best Buy
Is that “No Entry” sign in the background trying to sarcastic or ironic?
I’m thinking that Mancrush commercial would be more appropriate during the Tony awards, the Oscars aka the Super Bowl for gays, or men’s figure skating at the Olympics.
i’ll be damned if i didn’t wish that i never asked that question.
ManCrunch? Really? The gheys couldn’t name it something less queer? They should decline the commercial solely because of the shitty name they gave their website.
And Jesusback’s windup is longer than Satchel Paige’s.
Politics Flame War, I believe. And gay men don’t watch football because it isn’t on Bravo.