Posted on 12/21/2004 9:55:35 AM PST by St. Johann Tetzel
SHOP AT TARGET -- THEY SUPPORT LGBTQ FAMILIES
Rainbow Law is calling for the LGBTQ community to support and shop at Target stores this holiday season. After Target refused to allow the Salvation Army to place bell-ringers and kettles at their stores (because they discriminate against the LGBTQ community), the anti-gay equality crusaders began their usual lies and propaganda campaign.
There is no reason to let this attack go unchallenged. We have the power to counter the far right's relentless assault on our civil rights and liberties. And one of the most effective methods for defeating unfair practices is by using the power of our combined financial resources.
Why would you continue to support companies who donate millions of dollars to campaigns and politicians who are hell-bent on destroying your family?
Rainbow Law has compiled a detailed list of the companies that contributed money in support of campaigns and candidates who oppose equal marriage rights and we are calling for a general boycott of these companies. [FReepers take note: please support these companies to counteract any pressure the LGBT might bring!]
To win the election at any cost, political campaigns lied about Gay and Lesbian Families and they lied about what Equal Marriage really means. Because of those lies, eleven state constitutional amendments banning equal marriage rights passed.
And the opposition was successful in spreading the lies via the media. That is why Rainbow Law also suggests that we find an alternative to mainstream newspapers, television and radio stations. Especially Clear Channel Communications and Fox Television -- two media giants with a proven right-wing bias and agenda.
For an alternative perspective, turn the channel -- listen to and support your local public broadcasting stations. Watch your Public Broadcasting station for the news. Listen to National Public Radio and Air America Radio and read newspapers and magazines like Rainbow Law's Un-Censored E-Zine.
In addition to supporting Target Corporation for their courage to stand up to injustice, we hope you will think queer as you make any purchase.
Instead of spending money at straight-owned enterprises, purchase products from queer owned or queer friendly merchants. When you are in the market for a new home, car, insurance, etc, support people who support your family. If you need help at work or at home, hire queer people to do things.
In the past, boycotts have been used successfully to pressure corporate supporters of bigoted politicians into withdrawing their financial contributions.
Together we have the power to make a difference!
I choose this one because I know no such thing. Either the options you offer are not the only choices, or Target only acts like a French owned company. WalMart ain't scared, why are you?
Please read the AgapePress report more carefully, then get back to me.
Rick Garcia, director of the homosexual lobby group Equality Illinois, even admitted recently on WYLL's The Walsh Forum radio program that homosexual activists have pressured Target to stop supporting The Salvation Army.
The director of a homosexual lobby group publicly admits that "homosexual activists have pressured Target to stop supporting The Salvation Army" yet you still state there are "no hard facts"?
At this point, I think it would be safe to ignore the ranting of these two. Its clear how the majority of posters on this thread think, and these two do not post opinions that reflect the views of the majority of conservative posters on this thread. In other words, expect nothing more but personal insults from theme. They obviously cannot humbly admit defeat.
Sorry, Wal-Mart has destroyed not only communities but vendors. I know a food vendor that at first was thrilled to be selling to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart demanded that they sell fewer and fewer units to its competition. When it was its only buyer, the payment schedule was changed so that the supplier was hanging on by a thread because Wal-Mart didn't pay up at the agreed upon schedule. But, after they only had one buyer, what could they do? The vendor has sat in on meetings where strategy was discussed. Within the next few years, Wal-Mart will put the family food chains out of business. Everytime a food chain union strikes, they tell people to buy at Wal-Mart, which is stupid because it makes Wal-Mart shoppers out of their former customers. They will open locations by family food chains. And this is benign? Sorry...I am a very stupid consumer---but I buy from my neighborhood merchants whenever I can, be it a grocery store or pharmacy--or anything else.
I don't buy it.
The food vendor chose to do business with Wal-Mart on Wal-Mart's terms. Nobody forced him to do it.
As far as where they build stores? They build them where they can get business. And it seems to work.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart because I don't like the experience. Lots of people will put up with it for low prices. That's their choice and it's Wal-Mart's strength.
Quickly becoming Queasy.
LGBTQ = Let's Go Boycott Target Quickly
Frankly, I don't find their prices that much better than anybody else's. Unless it's on sale, their name brand basics are the same as everybody else's. GE light bulbs are the same as the grocery store. Wal-Mart's brand is cheaper, but no-name at the grocery store or Wal-green's is cheaper, too, but the light isn't the same.
I wondered how long it would take for one of you to break the silence between you two.
It was "deafening," given the contents of your respective homepages (a trick I learned from O.C.) It is so disappointing when people who claim to be Christians can't give a civilized ear to an apparently opposing viewpoint. I'm glad I became a Christian before I ran into either of you -- sorry, but that's my opinion of you; at the least you're a disappointment.
A lesson for you both: when you malign others' morality, your own will come into dispute. I can't take credit for that: Jesus said it first. Go read it for yourself. And learn something else: the forum is a place for respectful consideration for perspectives other than your own, and not just a comfort zone. A little back-patting is invaluable, but it's not all there is to life.
Something additional: the majority is sometimes dead wrong.
The Mom and Pop stores many of us grew up with are history. The "Big Box" stores with acres under roof staffed by four people are in control for now.
It's a lousy shopping experience and will always be vulnerable to competitors who can deliver "value" (if not the lowest price) to consumers willing to pay for better quality and service.
The Mom and Pop stores many of us grew up with are history. The "Big Box" stores with acres under roof staffed by four people are in control for now.
It's a lousy shopping experience and will always be vulnerable to competitors who can deliver "value" (if not the lowest price) to consumers willing to pay for better quality and service.
As I (and others) have pointed out later in the thread, Walmart takes the opposite approach-- equally spineless, in my opinion-- they let everyone on their premises.
Both approaches protect them from lawsuits. Target, apparently, has weighed the number of customers that would be pissed by having to walk by every solicitor, against the number of customers that are pissed that they're finally removing the sole exception to their policy.
Uh huh.
I'll refer you, good doctor, and any other interested party to your post #241-- the only instance of profanity on this thread.
I'll refer you, Mr. O.C., to post #275 where you, instead of answering someone's question (after they complimented both our points), referred to them as a "troll".
Or, if you like, you can refer to your post #166 which pretty much blankets all of those that disagree with you. I'm pretty sure my lone "personal insult" to you was to refer to you as a dogmatist.
Considering the attacks on my honesty, the suggestion that I remove myself from the discussion (censorship), and the general dismissal of any opinion other that that of your own, I will leave it to others to draw their own conclusions from our respective works on this thread.
Another potential doctoral thesis for you, by the way: Please list the number of times throughout history when the majority was right about any moral issue. I don't think you'll find the record anything to write home about. Doesn't mean the majority is wrong in this case-- just means they're not automatically right.
I attempted to be conciliatory, and backed off my over the top demand to recuse yourself, earlier in this thread, which you seemed to accept at the time.
It's Christmas. I do not desire further harsh words or contentious debate. I cede to you your points in your post, and apologize for any offense I have given you after I had attempted conciliation earlier. I should have held my tongue.
A Blessed and Merry Christmas to you.
Come up with another word for them?
Alan Keyes came up with a great word...hedonists.
Holding your tongue isn't the issue here; it's your apparent need to be morally superior. That's a major flaw that probably everyone has and needs to overcome; waving that around when honest debate is being attempted is worse than counter-productive.
I have a problem with O.C. for this reason: I perceive him to be rigid and uncaring about the results of his actions, and committed to maintaining a position of "argument" superiority rather than reasonableness.
I have a problem with you for this reason: you flip back and forth between understanding a need for Christian charity and needing to maintain a position of "moral" superiority.
The lesson Jesus tried to teach us was the need to achieve and maintain true moral character while helping others to achieve and maintain the same thing. Our righteousness does not come from intellectual or moral superiority -- indeed, we have none of our own as it is all a grace, a gift through Jesus' life, death and resurrection, and our willful appropriation of His provision. We need to remember that when engaging in any activity with other people, Christian or otherwise.
I appreciate your most recent effort at "reconciliation" with the other poster, but it STILL is smacking of moral superiority as you chide HIM about your previous (self-aborted) effort. A true apology lays nothing at the other party's feet.
I would urge you, if you are sincere, to read through all the interchanges again, without faulting others, and concentrate on what is going on inside of you that prevents a true interchange of ideas without character- or feeling-assassination of others.
I don't write to O.C. on this because I am convinced that he has no underlying desire to shift his attitude, in spite of his appearing to be open to that in his last posting to me. I hope he is not as incorrigible as he appears to me; that is between him and His Maker.
Speaking for myself, I have to guard against the same tendency -- false moral superiority -- and I suspect that is true of most "true believers" of any stripe. I have a very strong impulse toward reconciliation between people, and it truly pains me when they "talk past each other" so that possible resolutions, of ideas and/or feelings, are not reached.
I have tried to teach my children these same things, and I think I see the fruit of that in their lives today, and I am truly thankful for that. But that didn't happen because I maintained a moral high ground with them: I apologized frequently and tried to make sure it wasn't for the same mistakes repeated -- but sometimes it was and I apologized anyway. So my hat's off to you on that one: it pays big dividends. We don't have to be perfect, or pretend to be; I only know One Person who can make that claim, but I want to live my life in such a way as to please Him, and I know you do, too.
Far as I'm concerned, if there are Muslim kids in the school, then the 'Star and Crescent' and songs about Ramadan are completely appropriate. In fact, it's a good opportunity to learn a little about other cultures (my best friend is Jewish, and I always enjoy the opportunity to go to his synagogue. It's good experience, and the food is always good!)
BUT - and this is a distinction obviously lost on the teacher - Learning about a new religion/culture does not mean that you can ignore or ostracize any others. Diversity and Inclusiveness is just that.....either everyone's invited, or no one is.
Sounds like the problem stems from the principal. I had a spineless wuss like that for a principal when I was a senior in High School. He tried to enforce some 'diversity' and PC BS on the school. The kids pretty much ignored him or just made a joke out of it and he went away. IMHO, humor is the best way to fight idiots like that. People that take themselves too seriously can't stand up to being laughed at.
I'm sure it's different with smaller kids, though. Need to set a good example, and all that. Must be hard to teach them to respect authority, when the authority in power isn't worth respecting.
"I'm sure it's different with smaller kids, though. Need to set a good example, and all that. Must be hard to teach them to respect authority, when the authority in power isn't worth respecting."
You hit the nail on the proverbial head, wBill. No fool, my daughter has no respect for the music teacher now, and it isn't just parroting mommy's sentiments. I have no problem with kids learning about world religions, but in the proper context. Ramadan was long over by the date of the concert, its purpose in the song clearly a sop to political correctness, that yes, even a seven year old could see through.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.