God is an Abortionist
April 27, 2001 8:55 AM   Subscribe

God is an Abortionist or so read an ad that a reporter attempted to place in conservative college newspapers across the country. The result? He was even less successful than David "champion of free speech" Horowitz.
posted by turaho (5 comments total)
Well, both I think Mazel tried to get this to run at extremes, mostly Christian universities, of course they're not going to run it. It disagrees with them and their held views that their students must hold, otherwise they probably wouldn't be there.

And I don't know how reparation arguments are compared to God viewed as an Abortionist, I think abortion is a much more serious issue and Mazel takes it a bit too far, even make it tabloit-ey. No?
posted by tiaka at 9:14 AM on April 27, 2001

I did a google search on the first passage shown in the ad, and came up with this. I am not entirely sure of the slant, but it is coved in depth.

I don't find myself anymore surprised by this, than I was by the Horowitz stunt.
posted by thirteen at 9:15 AM on April 27, 2001

He was even less successful than David "champion of free speech" Horowitz.

Depends on how you define "successful". If you mean "actually getting the ads into the papers" then, yes, Horowitz didn't do so hot. But if you mean "getting craploads of free publicity and having the ads in question read by more people than ever would have seen them if they had been carried in the original papers without controversy" then David was successful beyond anything he could have reasonably hoped for. Maybe the same will be true of this guy.
posted by Shadowkeeper at 9:32 AM on April 27, 2001

I think that this was, generally speaking, a good turnabout-is-fair-play stunt, but:

* (as far as I know) Horowitz did not submit his ad to the student newspapers of historically Black colleges, which would be the analogy to to Mazel's submission of the abortion piece of Christian colleges.

* I think it is right to say that Horowitz objected less to newspapers refusing his ad (which is they unquestionably have a First Amendment right to do), than to the speach-suppressive reactions of the campus left to those newspapers which did accept the ad: stealing entire press-runs, occupying and vandalizing press-rooms, and demanding that the newspapers apologize for giving offense.

The valid comparison would have been for Mazel to submit his ads to the same mainstream-campus papers to which Horowitz did, and then observe the reponses of the conservative and Christian student groups on those campuses where the ad was accepted and ran. Something leads me to believe that Berkeley's InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and College Republicans would not have stolen every copy of the offending issue of the Daily Cal nor staged a sit-in at Eshleman Hall.
posted by MattD at 9:41 AM on April 27, 2001

Egads. I went to Abilene Christian University.
posted by Julia2100 at 11:35 AM on April 27, 2001

« Older Motorists who park in disabled spaces are to be...   |   Want stats? Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments