The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has stepped back into the fight for marriage equality here in New York by...rereleasing an ad they ran back in 2009—even though its claims have already been widely debunked. In response folks, including Assemblywoman Deborah Glick are pissed they have to see the ad on channels like NY1. Some are even calling for a boycott.

In response to the ads Glick last week went so far as to write a letter to the TimeWarner-owned news station asking them to stop airing the ad. Though she understands that "NY1 has the discretion to take advertisements both commercial and political in nature, based on [the] company’s standard of taste," she wrote, as a New Yorker and a lesbian I am disappointed and disheartened that you chose to run" the NOM ads. "This campaign is dedicated to ensuring that the current discriminatory denial of marriage equality for same sex couples continues. I am astounded at your decision."

The ad—which warns that your children will be forced to learn that "boys can marry boys" and that "it's not just kids who face consequences. The rights of people who believe marriage means a man and a woman will no longer matter. We’ll have to accept gay marriage whether we like it or not."—has already been taken apart by Politifact when the ad was aired in Rhode Island, but the gist of it bears repeating:

Bottom line: The National Organization for Marriage mailing says that Massachusetts public schools teach kindergartners about gay marriage. The wording, including the present tense verb, gives the impression this is happening now, in many schools.
But the group's only evidence is two incidents five years ago. It's possible that somewhere, in one of the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts, other kindergartners have been taught about same-sex marriage. But NOM couldn't cite any other examples. We find its statement False.

So far we've seen the ad on NY1 and, during last night's game, on TNT (NOM has not responded to our question asking if they've bought time on any other channels). Do you think, considering how split the New Yorkers appears to be on the topic, the channel should be airing the ad? Or should they have chosen not to, as other stations have with political ads before?