[Firefigher NC]

"First of all, they're cans, not bottles, so you can't just 'peel off the label."

My mistake. Anyways, wasn't it a little tacky of the beer company to give these cans to SBC, a group known for its anti-alcohol stance? I don't know if they accepted them (wouldn't make much sense if they did) or if they were just dropped off at their doorstep, but either way the media is making too much of a big deal over something minor.

[HairOfTheDog]

They weren't giving the water to the SBC, they were giving water to the hurricane victims.... and some ended up in the hands of the SBC

I don't see how donating water to a "supply center" can be considered tacky.

[flashbunny]

"My mistake. Anyways, wasn't it a little tacky of the beer company to give these cans to SBC, a group known for its anti-alcohol stance?"

Most likely, it's what they had on hand.

Since they're not the government, they're probably thinking of how to get the most supplies to the most people as fast as possible. Layers of bureaucracy do not slow them down if they don't want them to.

[jb6]

Anyways, wasn't it a little tacky of the beer company to give these cans to SBC, a group known for its anti-alcohol stance?

It would have been tacky if they gave them cans of beer (which can be argued in Bud's case are water) but they gave them something that people needed. The SBC showed their Christian humility and love alright. They deserve the criticism.