policy with pop

Tim Tebow: From the Football Field to the Political Arena

Tim Tebow seems a likeable guy. When Oklahoma cornerback Dominique Franks belittled the Heisman winner, he responded in a classy and humble way, earning my respect. Since then, he’s won another national championship, cried, and recently won the Sugar Bowl. But, the quarterback may be making a controversial play by participating in a Focus on the Family ad promoting a pro-life chance.

Liberal organizations, especially pro-choice groups, are criticizing CBS and Tim Tebow for the upcoming Super Bowl ad. The ad will reportedly feature Tim’s mother describing her decision to give birth to him. Obviously, that decision resulted in producing the Heisman-winning quarterback, which implies that every pregnant woman should not choose abortion.

CBS had previously rejected other political ads, stating that its policy was to reframe from such ads. Some feel like CBS has backtracked on this policy by allowing this ad, produced by right-wing religious group Focus on the Family. The group describes itself as a global Christian ministry. Focus on the Family has been described by some liberals as a hateful, anti-gay and anti-women group. Obviously, Focus on the Family is a controversial group.

Women’s organizations are not the only ones hoping to pass interfere with the ad. Some football enthusiasts say a political/religious ad is inappropriate for a day to tailgate, drink, and watch football.

Tim Tebow, like any high profile football player, is either loved or hated by football fans, depending on which college football team they are rooting for. However, Tim has always made his faith known to the public. Besides stories about his missionary trip and his vow to remain a virgin until marriage, he also puts Bible verses on his eye markings. But, I don’t recall him using his public microphone to preach advocate his political positions. This ad would be his first.

Defending himself from criticism over the Super Bowl ad, he argues that he’s just standing up for what he believes in. Sarah Palin also blocked the quarterback’s scramble, by criticizing women’s groups for their criticism of Tim and pro-lifers.

Does the ad’s affiliation with a ultra-conservative group matter?

Is the Tebow ad an attack on pro-choice group and laws?

Is it wise or noble for the quarterback to run into the political thicket of the abortion debate? Or should he concentrate on improving his football techniques?

Should CBS play the political ad? Or is it sacrilegious for the network to mix football with a political/religious debate? 

Congressman Joe Wilson Fries for Saying the President Lies

Decorum? What decorum?

Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC) screamed at President Obama, accusing the President of being a liar when he said his healthcare plan would not cover undocumented immigrants during the President’s Joint Session of Congress.

If you missed it, here is the clip:

Did you see Speaker Pelosi’s face? Shock and disgust.

And of course, every Congressional Democrat was outraged. Some are even talking about censuring the boisterous Republican. And, of course, they are cashing in on his outburst. Representative Wilson’s Democratic challenger raised more than $400,000 in one day.

While most Congressional Republicans have noted that Congressman Wilson’s outburst was inappropriate (including Wilson himself), some are coming to his defense. The "hottest freshman in Congress" Aaron Schock points out that Democratic membersaccused President Bush of being a liar in the past.

True. But, they made those comments at during their own speeches, press conferences and interviews, not at a Presidential address. Is it better that Wilson made the accusation to the President’s face? Or was the Joint Session of Congress an inappropriate time and place? If so, should he be punished?

Of course, Democrats expressed their displeasure at President Bush’s speeches during his Joint Sessions and State of the Unions. But, they booed and hissed at his policy positions. Is that are arguably different than making a shouted personal attack at President Obama’s character? Or is booing just as disrespectful during a Presidential address?

What do you make of Wilson’s comments? Was he accurate or lying himself? How does his behavior reflect on him and Republicans? And does this news bit help or detract from Obama’s efforts to win support for his healthcare plan?

By the way, what did you think of the President’s speech?

Smoke: Not in Your Club?

I randomly stumbled on this web video, Not in Your Guidebook. Watch it and learn more about the City of Angels:

Not In Your Guidebook from Adam Irving on Vimeo.

Alright, I didn’t randomly find this internet video. The host, Andres “Andy” Schabelman, was a roommate of mine in the past and practically forced me to watch it.  And, if Andres comes off as a tool, well, that’s because he is. Haha… I kid.

Anyway, in one of the segments, Andres goes into an underground, after-hours bar (a.k.a. a speakeasy). Apparently, anything goes at this speakeasy. Smoking laws be damned. The club allows its patrons to smoke cigarettes and… other things… despite state laws that ban such activity inside a building.

This raises the question: Should bars and clubs be forced to prohibit smoking inside their venue?

Anti-smoking groups argue that the negative health effects inflicted on non-smokers via second-hand and third-hand smoke justify the ban. Plus, cigarette smoke makes you and your clothes stinky…

Smokers and the tobacco industry claim that the health effects of cigarette smoke are exaggerated. Plus, they claim that smokers have a “right to smoke” and that a ban hinders their ability to exercise said right.

So what do you think? Are smoking bans in bars and clubs a good thing? Or is it too restrictive? Sound off.

Bad Michael Phelps or Perfectly Okay Michael Phelps?

Say it ain’t so, Michael Phelps! Say it ain’t so…

As you can see, the Olympic champion was photographed smoking a bong. At first I tried to defend him by saying that the photo was really of a skinny Jason Wahler.  But at last, Phelps admitted and apologized for the picture and smoking marijuana.

His statement: “I engaged in behavior which is regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment. I’m 23 years old and despite the successes I’ve had in the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a manner people have some to expect from me. For this, I am sorry. I promise my fans and the public it will not happen again.”

Unfortunately, this is not Phelp’s first drug-related incident. After the 2002 Olympics, Phelps, then 19, was caught drinking (alcohol) and driving. He received 18 months probation. Phelps was also ordered to speak to youths about the dangers of alcohol and attend a Mothers Against Drunk Driving victims’ impact panel.

Phelps’ pot picture will probably not result in such punishment, if any. Marijuana is not a prohibited sports enhancing drugs. Thus, the US Olympic Committee probably will not sanction him. This incident will probably cost Phelps’ wallet as it could cost him some of his sponsorships.

But, many don’t view Phelp’s weedy behavior negatively. There are many groups calling for the legalization of marijuana. They believe marijuana is not as dangerous as it’s made out to be. These groups say that alcohol and cigarettes, which are legal, are more life-threatening. Moreover, marijuana can be used in a medicinal manner. Thus, these groups see no reason to ban it.

But, smoking weed is illegal. The supporters of pot’s illegal status justify it a few ways. There’s the unhealthy aspect. There’s the notion that marijuana is a “gateway” drug – a drug that causes users to use other illicit drugs. There’s also the whole moral aspect. Some believe that the government should ban weed on moral grounds – that government should not endorse the use of pot by making it legally acceptable.

What do you think? Should marijuana be legalized or remain illegal?

And what do you think of Phelps after the bong picture? Is he still the golden boy? Or is his legacy clouded in scandal?

PETA to Ben & Jerry's: Moo to Milk

I scream. We all scream for ice cream!

Apparently, PETA is screaming too. PETA stands for the People of the Ethical Treatment of Animals. It is the largest animal rights organization in the world.

PETA is asking ice-cream chain favorite Ben & Jerry’s to make a seemingly radical substitute in ingredients. Ice-cream is traditionally made with milk. PETA wants to replace it with… milk.  Okay, so PETA is asking for the same thing but with a twist. Instead of milk from cows, PETA suggests Ben & Jerry’s to use human mother’s milk.

PETA argues that mother’s milk is a more natural and healthy alternative. It states that humans are the only species to drink another species’ milk. The organizations also cites research that drinking cow milk is linked to allergies, stomach cramps, autism, chronic ear infections, “juvenile onset diabetes, acne, obesity, flatulence, constipation, mucus and other illnesses.

PETA is also trying to make another point. The organization believes it is cruel to force cows to produce an un-cowly amount of milk – ten times more than they naturally do. Cows are forcefully impregnated every nine months to produce this amount and often times in filthy conditions. Would having women (theoretically) take up this responsibility highlight this point?

Anyway, if ice-cream was made with human milk would you eat it?

In any case, Ben and Jerry’s politely rejected PETA’s suggestion.

(The picture above was provided by foxypar4)

Saved by the Pill… I Mean Bell

In high school, were you class president, an environmentalist, a pageant contestant, a feminist, part of the glee club, a waitress (The Max), reporter (Bayside High radio station KKTY), a cheerleader, a lead vocalists of a band (Zack Attack), and a salutatorian? 

That long list of achievements describes Jessica Myrtle “Jessie” Spano from Saved by Bell. Don’t you feel like an under-achiever? Anyway, in Zach’s crew Jessie was the ambitious one, hoping to gain admittance into Stanford and the prestigious Ivy League. The pressure of competitive admissions, other people's expectations and her drive to succeed, however, took a heavy toll. Watch this tragic recap:

Okay, so Save by the Bell substituted caffeine pills for adderall and other “study drugs” in the episode “Jessie’s Song.” That is kind of silly. But, the practice of using drugs that keep students awake and focused is a real and common practice, especially at the university level. And the health risk they carry is also real.

Unfortunately for Jessie, she did not get into her dream schools of Stanford, Harvard, Yale or Princeton. She ended up at Columbia University… not too shabby. But was the price worth it?

Is the practice of using “study drugs” understandable or unacceptable? Should we discipline students who take drugs (illegally) for study purposes differently than those that use drugs for recreational purposes? How do we curb this practice?

I’m so excited! I’m so excited to read your comments!

Oh and just so you know:

Michael Phelps: New Breakfast of Champions GRRR-EIGHT!?!

Continuing our Olympic coverage:

Michael Phelps… What can I say? If you don’t know who he is, something's wrong. Very wrong. Alright, for the one person who doesn’t know, Michael recently won an unprecedented 8 gold medals at the Beijing Olympics.

Now he’s temporarily replacing Tony the Tiger. That’s right Michael Phelps has signed an endorsement deal with the Kellogg Company to be on the cover of Frosted Flakes and Corn Flakes. What!?! I thought the breakfast of champions was Wheaties… Well, that’s going to piss off some people.

Actually, it has. Nutritionists are criticizing Michael for promoting the kid-marketed Frosted Flakes, which has three times the amount of sugar that Wheaties has and a third-less fiber.  They worry that children will heed his picture, eat the cereal and become unhealthy and obese.

For his part, Michael reportedly eats 12,000 calories a day and burns it off swimming in the pool, so he probably doesn’t think about the health effects it has on us ordinary people.

But is Michael Phelps morally responsible for making sure his cereal endorsement is healthy, especially since it’s targeted towards kids?

Assuming that Michael actually eats and enjoys Frosted Flakes, is it better that he endorses it rather than promoting a healthier cereal that he rarely eats or even likes?

Men in Tights: Mandatory Circumcision?

Trials in Africa indicate that male circumcision can cut the rate of HIV infection in heterosexual men by 50%. Other reports show that male circumcision may reduce male-to-women HIV infection by 30%.

With these results, should we make circumcisions mandatory to reduce the spread of HIV, especially in areas most afflicted by the disease? Or is that paternalism (dictionary.com definition: the attitude that subordinates should be controlled in a fatherly way for their own good) at its worse… and painful?

Don’t know what a circumcision is? Ask your parents. Or you could watch this PG-13 clip from Robin Hood: Men in Tights for a non-medical explanation:

Yikes! So, umm… yeah…