Posted on 02/01/2007 5:48:02 AM PST by driftdiver
The point is that nobody is making you go to the warehouse or basement. This is a free country last time I looked.
Did Driftdiver use singular or plural? I thought this poster wrote "selections" (plural). And as for reality, Wal-mart doesn't just offer one book, but thousands. And most, from first glance, are not from mainstream publishers.
Before we deal w/"massive plots," can you at least acknowledge your previously stated error that Wal-mart offers no gay and lesbian books geared for minors? (Which was all I was initially addressing re: your comment)
Whether or not you or anything else thinks it's a "plot" [massive or not, maneur or not :) ] can we just stay on a simple subject, here? The question is simply this: Yes or no, does Wal-mart offer at least one book that is specifically marketed toward teens/minors on the subject of gay and lesbian subject matter?
No, you said, "Based upon this standard, every store should carry child porn, S&M titles, how to make bombs at home, etc. {NOT!!!] Now that you've flunked Basic Moral Philosophy, try again." And I replied that was a strawman argument because I didn't say every store should carry those items, but I do believe every store has the right to carry those items if they choose to. Do you not believe in that right for the retailer to decide how to run their business for themeslves?
Other than that, nice duck. Basically, I didn't comment on anything you said other than the following, so stick to defending this sentence (versus expanding the subject) before moving on: Does it not strike anyone as very 'Talibanish' to ban books that one doesn't agree with on moral grounds?
You are citing, in practically absolute fashion, that anyone taking a book off the shelf on the basis of "moral grounds" is a "Talibanish" act. Is that what you really believe?
Yes, that is precisely what I believe. Do you really believe that your morals should dictate what inventory Wal-Mart is allowed to stock?
"So, as long as Walmart has 1 book for sale about gays that wasn't written by a frothing bible thumper, they are "supporting" the "gay agenda"?"
They offer thousands of books, many of very questionable sources. They offer significant financial support. Also, I don't froth.
> as for reality, Wal-mart doesn't just offer one book, but
> thousands.
1117. About 0.002% of all titles available. Less than 1% of the books available regarding children or religion.
So, in your pointed little head, if such a miniscule percentage is unacceptable and is "promoting" something, how many titles WOULD be "acceptable"?
As an example, Wal-o-caust, offers more than twice as many books answering the query "Murder". Are they "promoting" the manslaughter agenda as well?
"Overhauling of Straight America"
http://www.parentsrightsusa.com/Overhauling%20of%20Straight%20America.htm
And my initial point to you, and what is highlighted in my last post, is that it doesn't take gunpoint kidnappings to target kids. You're basically saying that any Web site that puts a target on minors re: objectionable content should get a free pass from the objections of some parents?
Nobody is talking about doing any legal raids on a Wal-mart store. Nobody is talking about banning any books here. Nobody is talking about shutting down any Web sites here. We're simply talking about does a parent or consumer have a right to publicly raise an objection over the content of any book?
And if you answer an absolute "no," then not only have you shot the First Amendment in the foot, but you basically say no resource no matter how raunchy could ever be objected to, and that consumers have no voice.
Alright. I'll grant you both points.
Sure...I'll acknowledge that they have them. I didn't say they didn't though.
I fully agree with you.
"I am having a hard time picturing little Billy looking for a book on how to beat his newest XBox game and suddenly deciding he would rather know where Gay Muslims go for coffee and condoms."
The story is about more than a few books they are offering. The story is about how Wal-mart is telling families one thing, and then doing something else.
Walmart is continuing support for radical organizations that are anti-family. They are certainly free to do that. However, those people that disagree with Walmarts actions are free to stop spending money there and free to tell others why they think Wal-mart isn't such a great family friendly company.
"Conservatives are becoming less and less captialists and that is sad. "
Nonsense, this is capitalism in action. People are talking about companies and choosing to take their money to the companies they want to.
In part that is true, but they are demanding that Walmart follow their desires and not the company's.
Many of us (most of us I believe) do not decide where they are going to shop based on the question of family friendliness. For me the only question is; Do they have what I want in stock and at the best price?
"Censorship can only be done by controlling authority. However citizens can, and have, successfully pressured controlling authorities to ban books."
Citizens are seeking to pressure Walmart and not the government.
It's a condition known as 'gay on the brain.' It's a mental problem.
In this case Walmart is the controlling authority.
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.