News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 300     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 495     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 614     2 

Ashley Madison Advertising

T

TOreality

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I don't think its been talked about here yet, what does everyone think of this?

Personally, being that the good ol' TTC is in a deficit, they wouldn't be turning away money like that. To me, that's poor business.

One would think that society is strong enough to know that just because you see and read something, doesn't mean you have to run out and do it.

That's just my opinion..
 
Would it result in any money for the TTC? The TTC would still be getting the same cheque from Astral Media regardless of this one ad.
 
There's a reasonable case to be made that Ashley Madison is getting even more press out of being refused than if they were quietly accepted.
 
After the Atheist bus ads I fail to see why this should not be allowed. By their own definition there is no offensive content. No nudity. NO foul language.

I can't wait to see what happens when Ashley Madison sues.
 
kEiThZ said:
After the Atheist bus ads I fail to see why this should not be allowed. By their own definition there is no offensive content. No nudity. NO foul language.

I can't wait to see what happens when Ashley Madison sues.
Click to expand...

are you blaming the atheists and/or atheist bus ads? or saying that because the atheists bus ads were approved any ad regardless of its content should be approved?


By their own definition there is no offensive content
Click to expand...

maybe they crossed that line when they started running religious ads.


do you honestly think ads regarding atheism are in the same category as ads telling you to cheat on your partner? or that atheism is some sort of precursor to an attitude of "anything goes"?

BTW, atheism isn't akin to cheating. it's more akin to breaking up with an abusive partner or ending a relationship that wasn't working out for whatever reason. ads trying to convince you to convert to another religion with a different deity with promises of the good afterlife, now there's your call to infidelity! ;) or maybe not. that would probably be akin to ending a relationship and finding another partner. maybe it's those ads that call for interfaith get-togethers? nah, that's more akin to swinging. i got it! it's those ads that ask you to worship different gods in secret while maintaining your adherence to your faith that are matrimony ruiners. an ad telling confirmed catholics to go worship baal in secret is akin to an ad calling you to go cheat on your partner. but then the question arises, how do you cheat on an all knowing/ all seeing deity behind his back? ;) is it still cheating if you do it in front of the person?
 
Last edited:
It's a moral judgement. After all, at the end of the day marriage is largely a religiously based concept that's increasingly being discarded by our society (common law, simple shacking up, casual relationships, etc.). If the TTC is going to argue that morality should be evoked at all when approving advertising, I fail to see why one moral judgement (atheism) should be more valuable than another (marriage). Once you start advertising religions or religious values, you can't start picking and choosing.
 
Perhaps a "Life is too short to deal with the complications that arise out of having an affair, get a good divorce attorney instead" ad would be more appropriate.
 
kEiThZ said:
It's a moral judgement. After all, at the end of the day marriage is largely a religiously based concept that's increasingly being discarded by our society (common law, simple shacking up, casual relationships, etc.). If the TTC is going to argue that morality should be evoked at all when approving advertising, I fail to see why one moral judgement (atheism) should be more valuable than another (marriage). Once you start advertising religions or religious values, you can't start picking and choosing.
Click to expand...

marriage, assuming the type you subscribe to, is built on monogamy. religion didn't invent monogamy. the christian form of marriage may be a religious concept regarding its ceremony but it's borrowed from a form of morality based on a natural concept that is not an invention of religion. monogamy can be found in various species throughout nature. also, i wouldn't look to religion for what is deemed good moral relationship conduct. you might find your self embracing polygamy, incest and all kinds of weird stuff.

and, the collapse of the respect for marriage isn't the result of the loss of religious values. IIRC, atheists and agnostics are the least likely to get divorced compared to some of the most common, respected & influential religions.

if you can't tell the difference between an ad that allows the godless to express them selves just like the religious can and one that asks you to conduct yourself in a manner that is dishonest and might even have legal & financial consequences, you should examine the two more carefully.

IMO, and ad for a brothel is more moral than one that asks you to cheat on your partner.
 
kEiThZ said:
It's a moral judgement. After all, at the end of the day marriage is largely a religiously based concept that's increasingly being discarded by our society (common law, simple shacking up, casual relationships, etc.).
Click to expand...
I guess East Asians should quickly find a religious basis for their 4 millennia tradition of secular marriage.

If the TTC is going to argue that morality should be evoked at all when approving advertising, I fail to see why one moral judgement (atheism) should be more valuable than another (marriage).
Click to expand...
Atheism is a philosophical stance, not a moral judgement. It is a basis on which such judgements can be made, but "to believe in god or not" by itself is not a decision about morality (unless you take the position of fundamentalist theists that atheism is by itself immoral).
 
kEiThZ said:
After the Atheist bus ads I fail to see why this should not be allowed. By their own definition there is no offensive content. No nudity. NO foul language.
Click to expand...
Well, it's encouraging people to break the law. While Canada's Criminal Code does not identify adultery as an offence per se EXCEPT within the context of endangering the morals of a child:

"Every one who, in the home of a child, participates in adultery and thereby endangers the morals of the child or renders the home an unfit place for the child to be in, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years."
 
Admiral Beez said:
Well, it's encouraging people to break the law.
Click to expand...

It's also encouraging people to act like selfish, amoral douchebags. If someone wants to be in a non-monogamous relationship, that's perfectly fine by me, but "an affair" by my definition is inherently a violation of a monogamous trust. Strictly from a "prevent the public discourse from sinking further than it already has" standpoint, I'm glad the TTC chose not to carry their ads. ("Toronto the Good" indeed.)

I'm also not convinced by the argument that Ashley-Madison got more exposure by the TTC's refusal. If the streetcar wraps went ahead, you can bet that Eye, Now, Torontoist, BlogTO, Spacing et. al. would be up in arms. There'd be just as much media exposure either way. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't sort of situation.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top