2 Comments

  1. murt
    October 3, 2011 @ 7:35 pm

    Yes their apology is ambiguously worded at best – they do go on later to say the following:

    Where the ad exceeded the bounds of civil discourse was […] in its singling out of groups of people with whose sexuality the group disagrees.

    So it’s hard for me to discern what they are referring to when they talk about “positions [that] are are worthy of being part of a debate on this issue.” What is the issue to be debated here when they also say that they don’t agree with the singling out of transgendered people in the ad?

    Reply

  2. murt
    October 3, 2011 @ 7:38 pm

    And in case I’m unclear in my above post, I completely agree that there is nothing to be debated here.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *