«

»

“Lowe” Balling The American Muslim

What do you think about folks banding together to boycott a manufacturer?

I have always believed that in the world of commerce, the profit motive is the bottom line, that past practices or loyalties are antiquated notions, and that, like a shark, if the a consumer product company is not moving forward, it will eventually die, being put out of business be a nimbler more innovative competitor. Now since the customer is always right, the goal is to get the most paying customers to buy your product, no sales/no business. But Lincoln was right, that you can’t please everyone all the time, so decisions have to be made concerning the best selling techniques (and who to pander to) in availing your products to the buyers.

Another truism is that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, some squeaky wheels are mouthing off about Lowe’s advertising on The American Muslim TV show:

The group that started this fire storm is Florida Family. On their website they list several other companies that decided to pull their advertising from the show, whether you think Lowe’s bowed to bigotry or made a conscious profit motivated judgment, you make the call.

Clearly this program is attempting to manipulate Americans into ignoring the threat of jihad and to influence them to believe that being concerned about the jihad threat would somehow victimize these nice people in this show.

Notice that the group has gotten 65 past advertisers and 25 of 27 new advertisers to either limit or remove their spots from the show.

I did a post several months ago about a woman who got all indignant because Target gave money to an organization that promotes business friendly candidates in Minnesota and one of those candidates held positions that she interpreted as anti gay, so she decided to make a big production out of buying a bunch of Target items, then refusing to pay for those items and cutting up her Target charge card in the process. I figure anyone for any reason can boycott any company they like, just spare us the whole production of your heroic stance. If I see a Capital One commercial with that goofball Alec Baldwin and I get my feathers all ruffled, if I want to go with someone else’s credit card, it’s a free country.

Lowe’s problem, it appears to me, was that it tried to unruffle the feathers by making a public statement about it, which usually results in pissing everyone off. All the other advertisers left it up to capitalistic whims of the free market ,”We decide which products we advertise and which TV shows we advertise on based on what we think will make us the most money. These are in house decisions, not offered for public debate”.

But instead of just letting market forces play out like they are suppose to, an elected official (yep, from California, my state sure does rock) thinks an official state resolution is needed:

A state senator from Southern California was considering calling for a boycott of Lowe’s stores after the home improvement chain pulled its advertising from a reality show about Muslim-Americans.

Calling the retail giant’s decision “un-American” and “naked religious bigotry,” Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, told The Associated Press on Sunday that he would also consider legislative action if Lowe’s doesn’t apologize to Muslims and reinstate its ads. The senator sent a letter outlining his complaints to Lowe’s Chief Executive Officer Robert A. Niblock.

Wait, another Democrat nanny stater who wants more regulations on the free market…………go on!!

What a good idea, let’s make companies advertise on shows that are PC and present a point of view that we agree with, regardles of the business angle, to wit, whether it is a wise (profit inducing) business decision. What a pinhead.

On it’s face, and with the requisite proviso that I have not watched this show, I would think that it would be a good idea, beneficial in promoting the notion that most Muslims are peaceful and that most American Muslims love their country as much as we do and want what is best for it. Great, we can appreciate that. But in no way do we turn a blind eye to the fact that Sharia in all it’s forms is Un American and the very antithesis of those American ideals that these American Muslims embrace. We have Westernized Muslims who still don’t get it, who can’t discard the craziness of their religion. Apostasy and blasphemy laws have no place in a civilized society.

41 comments

No ping yet

  1. Manwhore says:

    But in no way do we turn a blind eye to the fact that Sharia in all it’s forms is Un American and the very antithesis of those American ideals that these American Muslims embrace.

    Wait, the show has Muslims on it who fantasize about Sharia Law? Those fucking bastards, blowing the plot all to hell. Get a show, and these pieces of shit just barf, piss and shit all over this Jesus fearing nation by saying that Sharia is the goal.

    I saw that episode too, rich. And like you I pissed my PJs and had to excuse myself to check my undies. I was so frightened of the word “Mooslim” that I went and hid behind a keyboard and wrote my biggest pissy pants post against Muslims…..EVAR! That’ll show ‘em how powerful and brave I am!

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6

      
  2. Kimpost says:

    I certainly don’t think that the government should step in and decide whether an add should be allowed to be pulled or not, but bigotry always saddens me. Floridafamily.org seems to be such an organisation.

    Ideally other advertisers would step in, but I’m not sure it’s that easy. Like you say, money talks. IF there is a anti-muslim sentiment out there, it might be financially sound to just bow out. Why bother with the controversy? Still, it’s sad.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

      
  3. sahrab says:

    who can’t discard the craziness of their religion. Apostasy and blasphemy laws have no place in a civilized society.

    Exactly, preach on my brother!

    Because of them damn scary ragheads I cant buy offsite liquor, and just recently got the right to buy beer, on Sunday, and still cant buy either between 2 am to 7 am. Hell because of the camel jockeys, when we vacationed in Kentucky, we had to travel almost 100 miles to another county in order to buy beer at all. I cant buy a vehicle on Sundays, and some states force companies to pay employees time and half on sundays, all because of the towel heads.

    Thanks to Allah I cant see a naked tit on subscription (Cable/Sattelite) TV, even movie channels unless its after 8 PM, or its early and its a PST movie channel.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      
  4. richtaylor365 says:

    Floridafamily.org seems to be such an organisation.

    In a perfect world groups like Floridafamily.org would first watch the show, see for themselves if they find anything offensive, then take it from there, but I get the idea that they got all riled about the title and fired off their bitch complaints to the advertisers before the first episode even aired.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  5. Kimpost says:

    I got the impression that the show in-itself is considered benign, even by the groups who oppose it. The producers seem to have chosen to follow “good” American Muslims. This troubles Florida Family, Jihad Watch and Atlas Shrugs, because they think that the show, by focusing on the good, are hiding the evils of radical Islam.

    They all probably would have preferred a show focusing on the threats from radicals.

    I personally think that they should make or fund such a show themselves, and leave the feel good portraits alone.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  6. richtaylor365 says:

    And if the ratings for this show don’t pan out and TLC finds itself cancelling it some time in the future (strictly for business purposes) CAIR would be first in line, labeling the TLC execs a bunch of bigots, calling for their own boycott.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

      
  7. Manwhore says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10

      
  8. Seattle Outcast says:

    I only boycott Apple. I just refuse to pay double for an inferior product.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      
  9. Manwhore says:

    By my downding I know rich read my poem. Fuck you too buddy! Happy Xmas!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      
  10. JimK says:

    Can anyone give me one good reason I should let Manwhore keep wasting my bandwidth?

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

      
  11. Manwhore says:

    Do whatever feels right, I guess. I don’t know what my banning offense was. “Hmmm, was it the libertarianism or the contraversialism? I guess we won’t know.

    Yeah, if you gotta do it Jim, I’m ready.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      
  12. Manwhore says:

    Pushing 60 bubba. I know the conversations are getting a little old. What was it like when no one cared?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      
  13. Thrill says:

    There’s only one Manwhore. Like him or not, he’s an original and he’s always been true as far back as the RTFLC archives go.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  14. Manwhore says:

    I’m actually SOOO glad I’m not on rich’s side. Everyday I wake up and love myself, my life, and the relationships I’ve made. Good thing it’s not subject to this decade old bullshit racism!! I’d hang myself if that was what I had to project to others, or had to imbue into my kid.

    Is it wrong to feel “eternal” pity? Can the child save itself from the parent? May god bless “its” soul.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      
  15. Hal_10000 says:

    I thought he boycott was silly. This is TLC, for fuck’s sake. Every show they do is softball life-affirming positive stuff. You want anti-Jihad stuff, change the channel.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  16. CM says:

    There’s only one Manwhore. Like him or not, he’s an original and he’s always been true as far back as the RTFLC archives go.

    At the risk of increasing the likelihood of a ban, I’d rather he was allowed to stay. It’s not like he posts a million times a day like me. And as Thrill correctly notes, he’s a unique flavour. The more flavours the better as far as I’m concerned (which is why I’d want Czar to stick around, in whatever capacity he feels comfortable with). But of course if that’s not what you’re after here, then it won’t factor in.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      
  17. Thrill says:

    Have it your own way. I’d be sorry to see you get banned again just because somebody jumped on your Islamophobia button and touched a nerve.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  18. HARLEY says:

    MW, What the fuck>………………..

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  19. CM says:

    On it’s face, and with the requisite proviso that I have not watched this show, I would think that it would be a good idea, beneficial in promoting the notion that most Muslims are peaceful and that most American Muslims love their country as much as we do and want what is best for it. Great, we can appreciate that.

    But in no way do we turn a blind eye to the fact that Sharia in all it’s forms is Un American and the very antithesis of those American ideals that these American Muslims embrace. We have Westernized Muslims who still don’t get it, who can’t discard the craziness of their religion. Apostasy and blasphemy laws have no place in a civilized society.

    I’ve separated your conclusion into two parts – it’s surely possible to have the first part without ignoring the realities of the second?
    Would you agree that the crazy American Muslims are a distinct minority?
    As for Sharia “in all it’s forms”, I assume you’re referring to the forms that actually do pose a threat.

    Gingrich joins Iranian clerics, Taliban leaders and Salafists of various stripes in believing that the most authentic expression of sharia law is fundamentalism and despotism.

    Other Muslims — many other Muslims — dispute this. The varied traditions of Islamic jurisprudence assign different weights to scripture, tradition, reason and consensus in the interpretation of Islamic law. Some assert it is identical to the cultural and legal practices of 7th-century Arabia, creating a real global danger. But others believe it is a set of transcendent principles of justice separable from its initial cultural expression and binding mainly on the individual. Most Muslims respect Islamic law. But the interpretation of sharia varies greatly from Saudi Arabia to Indonesia to Tanzania to Detroit.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-problem-with-gingrichs-simplistic-attack-on-sharia/2011/12/12/gIQAv0nZqO_story.html

    Just to be clear, this doesn’t mean I believe that you support Gingrich ;-)

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      
  20. richtaylor365 says:

    I saw that episode too, rich.

    You gotta be the dumbest person on the planet. I make it perfectly clear that I did NOT watch the show and you come back with ,”I saw that episode too”, is English that hard for you? See, that’s what gets you in trouble around here, you are so effing stupid that you can’t read English, so you spout off from a position of disadvantage.

    I went and hid behind a keyboard and wrote my biggest pissy pants post against Muslims…..EVAR

    Gee, that was nothing, you got offended over that?

    Oh, and I didn’t read your poem, not all of it, to tell you the truth it kind of creeps me out how much you envy me and my lifestyle, you always have and it has always been pathetic. It’s like Hinckley’s fixation with Jodie Foster, jesus but you need to get a life.

    Everyday I wake up and love myself, my life, and the relationships I’ve made.

    Of course you do, sponging off society collecting your welfare check off the largess and sweat of folks that actually work for a living. The biggest challenge you have every day is getting through that next level of World of Warcaft, that, or deciding which OWS protest you will visit, tough life you freeloader.

    Good thing it’s not subject to this decade old bullshit racism!!

    See, this is where you betray yourself coming off like some conservative, only a whinny liberal would banty that word around so easily, you expose yourself over and over. Peddle that nonsense somewhere else, ‘kay Sport?

    or had to imbue into my kid.

    No chance of that, is there? Your contact with women either requires payment or leaves them in tears, with a police siren in the background.

    Thanks, guys

    Thanks for what? The fact that they called you an oddity? A one of kind clown? High praise isn’t it?

    Won’t even face me man to man, has to get Jim to do the man work for him.

    What are you talking about? I’ve never went to Jim and asked him to ban you, that is something only a punk like you would do. It’s his site and he is the one (along with most here) that realize you are a waste of bandwidth. Seriously, have you ever added anything astute or of value here? How many times has he called you a cunt? Hey pal, if the labia fits.

    As I said before, I just ignore you because you are worse then a troll. At least with Mogoo , our last troll, he was entertaining, you bring zero to the table. It’s not your fault, you being intellectually challenged, but really, didn’t your mom ever teach you manners?

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

      
  21. ryansparx says:

    Can anyone give me one good reason I should let Manwhore keep wasting my bandwidth?

    No one else on the blog has the ability to help me work through my innate fear of Muslims and other assorted skerry brown people while simultaneously making my nipples hard. A very important niche that cannot be filled by just any amateur with a keyboard and an excess of internets.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  22. Mississippi Yankee says:

    At the risk of increasing the likelihood of a ban, I’d rather he was allowed to stay.

    You seem nervous CM. Not to worry, I will be banned long before you get the axe.

    And because it pertinent to the post subject… Three things about Islam

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  23. CM says:

    Was a joke. People around here seem to think very little of anything I say, so I assume my vote in any direction will in effect be a vote for the opposite direction ;-)

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

      
  24. AlexInCT says:

    Do whatever feels right, I guess. I don’t know what my banning offense was. “Hmmm, was it the libertarianism or the contraversialism?

    That made me laugh out loud. Stop insulting conservatives and libretarians dude.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  25. AlexInCT says:

    Was a joke. People around here seem to think very little of anything I say, so I assume my vote in any direction will in effect be a vote for the opposite direction ;-)

    Actually CM, I have agreed with you when you were right. That happens very infrequently, but it does despite you pretending otherwise. It was funny however to see you try to make a funny about it.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      
  26. JimK says:

    Manwhore is done. I’ve simply had too much of his particular brand of stupidity. I’d rather watch Alex and CM argue for the rest of my life than read his nonsensical bullshit. He’s a cunt, he’s been a cunt for a long time and I’m sick of the slime trail he leaves.

    Maybe now we can discuss Islamic or LEO issues without Crazy McGee shitting nonsense all over the thread?

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      
  27. Tripper says:

    The OP on Lowes covers a lot of good points.
    Here’s my take on them:

    I certainly don’t believe government should step in to force a TV chanel to accept certain commercials or reject certain other ones, aside from the already commonly accepted decency points, but there already exists laws dealing with that and it’s about the content of what is shown on the channel, including adds presumably.

    What does the hairbrained politician really propose to do in this case? Lowes decided to pull their commercials, for whatever reason they wish to state, and they can come up with legit reasons that have nothing to do with the specific show if they want to (I won’t buy those reasons, but I can’t disprove them). Does he think he can force Lowes to advertise in slots where they decide they don’t want to? Is his plan simply that once you commit to a slot you can’t change your mind? This is one of those things where the pol in question might feel good about himself making his initial statements but lets see you actually try to legislate something out of it.

    As far as people and their protests go. I’m with Rich on this one for the most part. People are free to protest whatever they like as long as they remain within the law with their protests. If you are going to protest then I’d prefer you just do it and don’t be a dick about it though. Sure, the point is to get noticed, so you’re going to try and get some attention, but the woman having a bunch of shit rung up at Target with no intention to buy it is just being a bitch. I’ve worked in retail and she’s just being a cunt to the people who have to deal with it through no fault of their own, sure, they are paid to deal with it by the employer who she had a gripe with but it still, cut your card up in front of the press or whatever, but why mess with the staff?

    A different question worth asking is: While we can accept that these Florida folks have a right to their protest and their requests to have advertisers pull their slots from their show, are they right to do so? There are some who’d maintain that since they have a right, then they can’t be wrong. Of course I have a right to berate my wife in public for no reason other than my own amusement, but would anybody claim I was doing the right thing if I did?
    This group is basically bullying Lowes into pulling their adds, with the threat that they’ll kick up a big stink about it and enough people will buy this Florida groups message that they’ll stop shopping at Lowes. Lowes are not doing anything illegal by advertising on this channel, and there is nothing illegal about the channel or the show. The Florida group are seeking to silence the show because for whatever reason they don’t agree with it and so they are being bullies about it.
    So for me, while I believe they have a right to be bullies like this, and it’s up to Lowes to decide how to react, I think the Florida group have shown by their actions that they are a bunch of dickheads.

    But then again, opinions on topics such as this are going to depend on your view of the group threatening or carrying out the protest.
    I had a discussion with a self proclaimed conservative once where he took the position that Peta were in the wrong for protesting about the treatment of chickens in factory farms, outside of a KFC. They were offering leaflets to patrons who walked in and out and playing it all up for the media as they tend to do, but doing nothing illegal.
    Possibly because I am for animal rights (though no fan of Peta) I thought it was ok, though I’d hope I’d think that way reguardless. He on the other hand thought they were in the wrong for protesting a legal activity.

    I don’t shop at Lowes anyway because I have a Home Depot and a Menards closer, but if I did, their actions here might cause me to change that, though I suppose I might just register my disapproval of them bowing to the pressure of a bunch of idiots, and perhaps say if I saw a similar trend continuing I’d take my business elsewhere, this on it’s own is probably not that bad in my eyes since they were bullied into it a bit.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  28. richtaylor365 says:

    Whether they are right (or wrong) in their boycott really is irrelevant to me. I don’t like the precedent of advocacy groups bullying public companies into actions more in line with their sensibilities. I didn’t like it when the Jesse Jackson run Rainbow Coalition extorted cash pay outs (in the form of donations and skewed hiring practices) from public companies, too scared to fight back and frightened by the threat of a boycott. But these strong arm tactics work so other advocacy groups try it.

    FloridaFamily.org strikes me as also against shows that exhibit more nudity then they are comfortable with, they probably threaten those shows as well. I would hope that they at least saw the American Muslim TV show first before they objected to it.

    Ditto, if Muslims want to ban together to boycott a TV show or a product that advertises on that show, that they object to, have at it.

    I stopped trying to figure out what passes for entertainment long ago. That guy from CAIR brought up Jersey Shore. MTV clearly makes lot’s of money running a show about addled self absorbed and shallow teenagers, maybe TLC thinks it can corner the Muslim audience, worth a try.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  29. Tripper says:

    But presumably if a public company is doing something or stands for something you disagree with strongly enough, you wouldn’t want to give them your business right?
    And if you felt strongly enough about it wouldn’t you want to tell somebody else about it, perhaps even on these pages?

    It’s really not a far leap from there to where this Christian group are at. They just kick it up a notch.

    I’m still mostly in agreement though (and on Jesse Jackson and other such groups). If the Florida nuts don’t like the show they should probably just not watch it. If they really don’t like the show perhaps they should boycott the channel as well. Threatening the advertisers is a bit much.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  30. Section8 says:

    I have no problem with boycotts. They are a better way to send a message than laws. Now do I agree with this boycott, don’t know, haven’t watched the show. I do know over the years though that many companies won’t use the word Christmas, and where was the bigotry uproar over that? At the end of the day, people can have at it with their boycotts, If companies cave then great, if they don’t, great, 95% of everyone else are like me, and if you sell it cheap and it doesn’t break you’ve got my business.

    What the fuck happened with MW? He’s all over the place these days. Anyhow, good to see you’re still around Thrill.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  31. Tripper says:

    I do know over the years though that many companies won’t use the word Christmas, and where was the bigotry uproar over that?

    You’re kidding right? There’s a stink over this every year.
    I’m not sure how not using the word Christmas is bigotry though.

    It sounds like Russel Simons is now calling for a Lowes boycott over this.
    I guess they left themselves open to it since they’re reaction to the Florida nutters was to cave, they sent a message to anybody else that if you want them to behave a certain way you just threaten them with a boycott.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  32. Xetrov says:

    I have never actually carried a handgun in my life for self protection (though I do own one). But I will not give my money to the stores that have a no handgun sign in their windows, or no weapons allowed policies, because I disagree with them. It’s not illegal for them to have no gun signs up (there’s actually a law in this state saying they can do it). But I won’t patron them because they do. I don’t expect anyone else to, it’s just my own personal boycott.

    I don’t believe organizations should threaten companies. If you’re going to boycott, boycott. If it hurts the business enough, they will react. If it doesn’t (which I don’t believe it would have done squat in this particular case), the company can continue to ignore the boycott.

    I am less likely to shop at Lowes because they caved.

    Oh yeah – The politician that wants to legislate this needs to take a flying leap.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  33. Tripper says:

    It would be worthwhile at least letting the business know that you’re not patronizing them anymore and the reason why. At least it would be if your goal is for them to change their position.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  34. Section8 says:

    You’re kidding right? There’s a stink over this every year.

    Have you been in a coma? Really? You’ve never heard of some of the chain stores dropping the word due possibly being offensive? It’s now Happy Holidays, even though some chains have brought the word Christmas back. Take a look around some time.

    I’m not sure how not using the word Christmas is bigotry though.

    Right, since it’s associated with Christians, how could it be? Now if it had to do with another religion it certainly would be. Understand?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  35. Xetrov says:

    At least it would be if your goal is for them to change their position.

    My goal is to not give them my business. If a company is willing to have such a rule in the first place, my pressuring them to change it doesn’t alter the fact that the core reasoning that allowed the creation of such a policy is still there.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  36. Tripper says:
    You’re kidding right? There’s a stink over this every year.

    Have you been in a coma? Really? You’ve never heard of some of the chain stores dropping the word due possibly being offensive? It’s now Happy Holidays, even though some chains have brought the word Christmas back. Take a look around some time.

    Right, that’s what I mean. I know that a lot of people and businesses say “Happy Holidays” now, and I know that a bunch of people get pissed off that they’re not saying “Merry Christmas” instead.
    What I’m surprised at is your “Where’s the uproar over that” comment. Every year I hear a bunch of folks bitching about it. There’s always a whole stream of articles about “the war on Christmas” in papers, online and on TV. That’s the uproar
    Just now I went to Google news and did a search for “Merry Christmas” (inc. quotes)
    The first search result is from the Washington Post and is titled “Conservatives rate ‘naughty and nice’ Christmas retailers”. Google news groups stories by topic and it tells me there are 58 in total, you can view them all here and that’s what comes up on a search just for the term “Merry Christmas”, not “Merry Christmas Uproar” or whatever.

    I’m not sure how not using the word Christmas is bigotry though.

    Right, since it’s associated with Christians, how could it be? Now if it had to do with another religion it certainly would be. Understand?

    It’s nothing to do with it being Christians. If I was going around saying bad things about Christmas then you’d have a point, but people just not saying “Merry Christmas” is not anti-Christian bigotry. Are the same “Happy Holidays” offenders also anti-semitic because they make no mention of Hanukkah?

    You’re basically saying that if people don’t specifically make mention of a particular religious holiday, they are bigoted against that religion.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  37. Section8 says:

    It’s nothing to do with it being Christians. If I was going around saying bad things about Christmas then you’d have a point, but people just not saying “Merry Christmas” is not anti-Christian bigotry.

    Why were retailers shying away from saying Merry Christmas to begin with? Any ideas? Answer: because they didn’t want to offend anyone, which in itself is bigotry against Christians. Yeah, we’ll retail the shit out of your holiday, we just don’t want to offend anyone with the Jesus part of it. Understand now?

    And yes, christian conservatives were pissed off and for once I don’t blame them. I didn’t hear much from the left who cry religious bigotry at the first hint some group other than Christians might be offended over whatever. I mean this is common knowledge.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  38. CM says:

    Answer: because they didn’t want to offend anyone, which in itself is bigotry against Christians.

    W.T.F? Accomodating other religions, or non-religious people, is inherently offensive to Christians? How does that work?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  39. blameme says:

    I think it would be akin to having any mention of Ramadan removed during the Muslim holiday season. Or Hanukkah removed during the Jewish holiday.

    When you make it so “accommodating” that you remove all religious links, then that would be offensive.

    Imagine a Veteran’s holiday where you can’t mention anything about the military etc.

    It is “offensive” in some sense to see Merry Christmas removed and replaced with Happy Holidays.

    Of course, I don’t really care as I say Merry Christmas anyway as that is the actual, you know, HOLIDAY that we are celebrating. Removing Christmas from Christmas is just more PC bullshit.

    I don’t expect Muslims to change the name of their holidays, or Jews their for fear of my being “excluded.”

    It is just ridiculousness to do this PC crap when there are so many more important things to worry about.

    I have had Muslims and Jews wish me Merry Christmas. They do not care about the name – as does most of the rest of the world. The ones that do, or feel “excluded” are looking for a reason to be offended.

    But again, I tend to not worry about the war on Christmas so to speak. I still do my thing, as does my family and we hope everyone enjoys the season, Christian or not. So, I am not offended as I expect this kind of PC bullshit from the world regarding Christianity. We are a fairly easy target – we don’t get pissed enough to blow up buildings en mass, behead people etc. We tend to mouth off, then shut up and take it.

    Let’s see the PC gang remove Ramadan (or make it non pc to say during that time of year). Then we will see how much they really believe in making sure no one is excluded. My take – nary a peep against Islam and their holidays.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  40. CM says:

    When you make it so “accommodating” that you remove all religious links, then that would be offensive.

    I still don’t see the ‘offense’ against Christians specifically. It comes across as stupid and kind f pointless, and offensive to reasonableness, but if you’re offending all religious people equally bu ignoring the fact that the whole people of the holiday is religion, then it’s not just offensive to Christians specifically.

    It is just ridiculousness to do this PC crap when there are so many more important things to worry about.

    I completely agree. I always say “Merry Christmas” because that’s what it is. Even though I’m not even remotely religious. I don’t care if the person I’m saying it to isn’t a Christian. People who actively go out of their way to remove the religious aspect just make me roll my eyes. But I don’t consider that they’re displaying ‘bigotry against Christians’. Mostly I think they’re just kinda being dicks and doing it for the sake of it. So I think there’s a possible danger of being dicks about people being dicks…..

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  41. AlexInCT says:

    W.T.F? Accomodating other religions, or non-religious people, is inherently offensive to Christians? How does that work?

    I have no bone in this fight, but when you go out of your way to “accommodate” others, but then also wage a scorched earth campaign against what the christians believe, way to often using that “accommodate others” as an excuse to do away with just the things that affect Christians, it is obvious why many christian people feel it is offensive. Here in the US, the people that have the biggest problems always seem to have an anti-christian agenda or are muslims playing the “aggrieved” card. I usually hear how christmas icons offend Jews, but most Jewish people can’t even be bothered. The complaining is always from the atheists

    When you try not to offend or accommodate everyone, what you do is offend and piss off everyone. Especially the people that like to feel offended or aggrieved, practically always without any real legitimate reason, because then they can abuse the situation. That’s indisputable. This PC bullshit causes more trouble than it ever addresses. Yeah, that’s my opinion, but the facts bear out in my favor.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      

Comments have been disabled.