Super Bowl Surreality: Fox Rejected Pro-life Commercial, but Ran Drag Queen Ad – VIDEO

  • Post Author:

Super Bowl Surreality: Fox Rejected Pro-life Commercial, but Ran Drag Queen Ad

Written by  

“Let all the babies be born. Then let us drown those we do not like,” remarked G.K. Chesterton in 1932. That certainly would bring home the reality of abortion. Yet that many would rather drown it out is no doubt a major reason why FOX Sports, after giving a pro-life organization a six-month run-around, wouldn’t air its Super Bowl advertisement. Making matters worse, the network did air a commercial featuring Sexual Devolution activists and drag queens. Welcome to the new abnormal.

It’s not that FOX had a problem with controversial ads, per se, run during this year’s big game in which the Kansas City Chiefs beat the San Francisco 49ers 31-20. The network did play, for example, campaign commercials for President Trump and Michael Bloomberg. One of the latter’s ads involved an attack on Trump; another was devoted to gun restrictions and evoked controversy and accusations of deceit even before the Sunday event. All in all, presidential candidates and their allies spent more than $21 million on Super Bowl ad buys. Money talks.

Except, that is, when it’s pro-lifers’ money. Just ask the group Faces of Choice. It contends that FOX “deliberately delayed approving its application for airtime so that they would run out of air space before having to issue a response to the request,” reported The New American on Thursday.

“The commercial in question features more than a dozen abortion survivors in varying stages of their lives from all around the world, who ask, ‘Can you look me in the eye and say I should have been aborted?’ The advertisement’s youngest abortion survivor is seven-year-old Zechariah Hagan, one of the first abortion pill reversal (APR, a treatment to reverse the effects of an initial dose of an abortion drug) success stories,” TNA continued.

Faces of Choice premiered its powerful new ad at the March for Life January 24 and had hoped to air the shortened version of it (below) during Sunday’s big game.

But while the group’s hopes were dashed, FOX did run a Sabra hummus commercial featuring “drag queens Kim Chi and Miz Cracker from ‘RuPaul’s Drag Race,’” to quote LifeNews.

No, the Sabra commercial is not explicitly political. But if some think this renders it socially irrelevant, it’s not just that what’s assumed is learned best and that all ads transmit “values,” implicitly if not explicitly. It’s that the sexual devolutionaries themselves say otherwise. Just consider LGBTQ marketing strategist Bob Witeck, who celebrated the commercial.

“’For queer audiences, it is an art form and an ‘outsiders’ language,’ Witek [sic] said of drag,” LifeNews relates the activist as telling NBC. “‘Reaching the Super Bowl means taking our language into every home in the nation and millions around the world.’”

“Witeck said the Sabra ad, which could reach around 100 million viewers during the Super Bowl, is indicative of a sea change in the public perception of drag, which he said has been normalized in the mainstream for many years, thanks in large part to the success of the award-winning reality show ‘RuPaul’s Drag Race,’” NBC continued.

The normalization Witeck speaks of is a tried and true strategy, outlined long ago by two sexual devolutionaries named Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. In their 1989 book After the Ball, they called for a “conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will” on homosexual behavior “through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media.”

The idea is to bombard people with the images, characters, and ideas associated with the behavior in question until they’re inured to them; also, encourage people to conflate the actor with the act as much as possible (not hard, since people often do this naturally) so that those opposing the act are seen as opposing the actor.

Once accomplished, the next step is to attach such value to the actor — and to the idea of valuing him — that those seen as opposing him (by virtue of opposing his behavior) will themselves be stigmatized, along with their morals. This is how you flip society’s script from virtue to vice and Truth to lies.

Hunter and Madsen mentioned this, too, stating that society’s thinking could be transformed (twisted) so that homosexual behavior’s opponents would be cowed and “effectively silenced” in the future. That future is today — and now the process is being repeated with the Made-up Sexual Status (MUSS, or “transgender”) agenda.

Far from reflecting love, however, the sexual confusion engendered by the MUSS movement devastates kids. A good example is Nathaniel (last name withheld), a teen boy who had the misnamed “sex-change” surgery a bit more than a year ago, shortly afterwards regretted it, and now calls it a “Frankenstein” transition that has “ruined” his life. The MUSS agenda is rending bodies, psyches, and souls, and those in its grip too often meet their end in suicide.

But no other type of child abuse’s body count compares to prenatal infanticide’s, and this is no doubt a reason why so many don’t want to see the Faces of Choice ad. Thus did FOX make the group jump through hoops for six months, taking the coward’s way out. The network ran out the clock (excellent summation here), says the pro-life organization’s founder, Lyric Gillett — and then finally just said it had run out of ad space.

But it’s really just that prenatal infanticide’s defenders are running from Truth. Many people don’t even know that abortion survivors exist. And seeing their appeals brings home that they’re not just real live human beings now, with the capacity for love greatness — they also were so in the womb.

Then there are those who aren’t so lucky. Some of their stories are brought to you in the gut-wrenching Life Dynamics video below (the segment beginning at 8:34 is especially jarring)

But the problem here isn’t so much that we don’t know what to do, but that we don’t do what we know. As Chesterton also wrote, “Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable.”

Selwyn Duke (@SelwynDuke) has written for The New American for more than a decade. He has also written for The Hill, Observer, The American Conservative, WorldNetDaily, American Thinker, and many other print and online publications. In addition, he has contributed to college textbooks published by Gale-Cengage Learning, has appeared on television, and is a frequent guest on radio.

Courtesy of The New American