Skip to comments.
Southern Baptists End Disney Boycott
AP ^
| 6/22/05
| Rose French
Posted on 06/22/2005 2:04:39 PM PDT by cubram
Southern Baptists ended an eight-year boycott of the Walt Disney Co. for violating "moral righteousness and traditional family values" in a vote on the final day of the faith's annual convention Wednesday.
"We believe for the boycott to be effective, it had to have a beginning and an ending," said Gene Mims, chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention committee that put the Disney resolution before some 12,000 members at the meeting...
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: baptists; boycott; disney; sbc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-46 next last
To: Paradox
I've heard rumor that they ended it because of the upcoming Narnia movie (which looks like it will be really sweet) which was produced by a christian company. Disney is putting the movie out.
21
posted on
06/22/2005 2:39:35 PM PDT
by
leezard
To: TheBigB
Southern Baptist bashing again?????????
22
posted on
06/22/2005 2:51:06 PM PDT
by
Coldwater Creek
('We voted like we prayed")
To: leezard
I think that is part of it, but Mike Eisner is also out as CEO. Mike was a big part of liberalizing, homosexualizing, sodomizing, Disney, including their movie making interests. Taking my family of small children to a park only to see a couple of perverts in action is not my idea of family fun anymore than Mike Jackson's Neverland exploits.
I am Methodist and can tell you I honored the boycott for a dozen years. Disney is also outrageously expensive to the point of being a scam of sorts.
23
posted on
06/22/2005 3:07:33 PM PDT
by
Neoliberalnot
(Conservatism: doing what is right instead of what is easy)
To: Paradox
A lesbian friend of mine had complained to me just yesterday that Disney was ending "gay day". Disney never had a "gay day." Gay groups would have a day where they encouraged their members to go, but that is really no different than when, say, the Shriners all go to Disney on a given day. It was not an official Disney event.
24
posted on
06/22/2005 3:10:15 PM PDT
by
Modernman
("Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." -Bismarck)
To: Neoliberalnot
Taking my family of small children to a park only to see a couple of perverts in action Do you honestly think anything like that ever happened? Disney security is draconian, to say the least. If you think Disney allows homosexuals to get it on in their parks, I've got a bridge to sell you.
25
posted on
06/22/2005 3:12:30 PM PDT
by
Modernman
("Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." -Bismarck)
To: Modernman
Disney security is draconian... Yeah, just try taking "outside" food into Disney World. We should put Disney security on the borders.
26
posted on
06/22/2005 3:17:54 PM PDT
by
Warren_Piece
(Large buttocks are pleasing to me, nor am I able to lie concerning this matter)
To: Neoliberalnot
I agree with you. This was all about Eisner. What's changed since the start of the boycott? He's gone. It was personal.
27
posted on
06/22/2005 3:19:07 PM PDT
by
Warren_Piece
(Large buttocks are pleasing to me, nor am I able to lie concerning this matter)
To: Warren_Piece
You "can" take outside food into Disney. I have done it many times.
28
posted on
06/22/2005 3:25:54 PM PDT
by
packrat35
(reality is for people who can't face science fiction)
To: Modernman
How soon we forget Pleasure Island at Disney World.....
To: cubram
"We believe for the boycott to be effective, it had to have a beginning and an ending," said Gene Mims, chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention committee
Let's see. Boycott was clearly ineffective. Unless anyone thinks that Disney was hurting as a result of it. Disney did absolutely nothing to change their policies. And now the boycott has been lifted. Looks like they realized that their boycott was completely worthless and decided to give up.
To: Paradox
A lesbian friend of mine had complained to me just yesterday that Disney was ending "gay day".
I doubt this. For one thing, Disney never oganized it - it was orgnized by gay/lesbian groups. And even if Disney wanted it to end (which I doubt since they make money off it), how would they do so? Refuse to allow in people wearing leather chaps or comfortable shoes? : )
To: Warren_Piece
We should put Disney security on the borders.
Finally, a suggestion that makes sense! I can see it now.
It's a small world after all... but stay out of my corner of it! : )
To: tfecw
33
posted on
06/22/2005 8:28:49 PM PDT
by
festus
(The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
To: Modernman
I don't know where you have been, Modernman, but check out gaydays.com for the latest homosexual/pedophile scheduling at Disney World and other amusement part sites. This has been going on for 15 years.
34
posted on
06/23/2005 5:53:32 AM PDT
by
Neoliberalnot
(Conservatism: doing what is right instead of what is easy)
To: Warren_Piece
Why or how could it possibly be personal?? It had nothing to do with personal since few people know anything about Eisner, and everything to do with turning normal family entertainment (ie Walt Disney's intent) into whatever it takes to pander to every deviant group on the planet.
35
posted on
06/23/2005 5:56:38 AM PDT
by
Neoliberalnot
(Conservatism: doing what is right instead of what is easy)
To: Neoliberalnot
I don't know where you have been, Modernman, but check out gaydays.com for the latest homosexual/pedophile scheduling at Disney World and other amusement part sites. I checked out the website. There is nothing on there that shows that these are Disney-sponsored events.
36
posted on
06/23/2005 7:04:44 AM PDT
by
Modernman
("Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." -Bismarck)
To: Modernman
I don't think anybody is suggesting that Disney is a paid sponsor as much as they are a provider of the venue for the meeting place.
37
posted on
06/23/2005 8:04:25 AM PDT
by
Neoliberalnot
(Conservatism: doing what is right instead of what is easy)
To: Neoliberalnot
I don't think anybody is suggesting that Disney is a paid sponsor as much as they are a provider of the venue for the meeting place. Sure. But is that a fair criticism of Disney? They don't have any real control over who comes to their parks. Disney doesn't kick people out based on sexual orientation or whatnot, so long as they follow the rules.
Why do you blame Disney for the fact that gay groups come to their parks?
38
posted on
06/23/2005 8:14:55 AM PDT
by
Modernman
("Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." -Bismarck)
To: Modernman
I have to be quick here. Disney also provides benefits for homo partners and some of their movies are anything but, for the "family."
39
posted on
06/23/2005 9:09:23 AM PDT
by
Neoliberalnot
(Conservatism: doing what is right instead of what is easy)
To: Neoliberalnot
Disney also provides benefits for homo partners and some of their movies are anything but, for the "family." Fair enough. However, why does it bother you that Disney gives same-sex benefits to its employees? That's no skin off anyone's back but Disney's shareholders.
As for the movies Disney makes, well, nobody is forced to go see them. Movie studios make a wide variety of movies for different audiences. Why is it a problem for you if the same company that makes a G-rated movie also makes an R-rated (or whatever) movie?
40
posted on
06/23/2005 9:14:21 AM PDT
by
Modernman
("Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." -Bismarck)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-46 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson