One Million Moms Want Same-Sex Archie Comic Out of Toys 'R' Us

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

The_root_of_all_evil:

Volf:
I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Take a trip round your local toy store and see what children get exposed to anyway.

imageimageimageimage

Especially as the shelves are designated as toys for BOYS and toys for GIRLS; with appropriate colours so you can remember which toys are yours and why you must never play with the other toys.

It's not like there's anything there that will hurt them...

image

and there are parents that have issues with those toys as well.

lol at the cellphone comment.

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Nobody is "depriving" you of anything, but why does your opinion have more value to it then mine? I don't like something, but I just have to deal with it, but if the tables are turned, now I'm "depriving" you of something? Hypocritical much?

I didn't bring up the subject, but now that you have, why is this different? I realize its not the same thing as them seeing porn, but what if I don't agree that this is a subject I want young children to be exposed to? How is this different from that? While porn and homosexual marriage are not the same thing, they are two subjects that I don't think young children should be exposed to. Again, what about those of us that don't think homosexual marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage? Why should we have children's material deal with this subject if we don't want to have them exposed to it?

To put it very simple: Your opinion is of exactly equal worth as another persons. But since there aren't a lot of you (or enough of you), it matters LESS. That's how our democracy works.

My point still stands about the "depriving" comment.

No, it doesn't. We live in a capitalistic system. Peoples right to express an opinion does not equal their right to censure a private-owned corporation. You can't say "My opinion is that X-business is bad, and thus, I want it removed/censured/shut down" unless there is enough of you to either A: Get a law passed, or B: Make a capitalistic pressure (i.e voting with your wallets) large enough to get the corp to change their mind.
So, good luck.

Volf:

artanis_neravar:

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

And they can, buy not taking them to Toys R Us, not taking them in the check out lines with the comic in it, or any number of other simple fixes, but they do not have the right to deprive my kids of something that they find offensive.

Nobody is "depriving" you of anything, but why does your opinion have more value to it then mine? I don't like something, but I just have to deal with it, but if the tables are turned, now I'm "depriving" you of something? Hypocritical much?

Because your opinion is the one that is taking something away from me. My opinion leaves something the way it is. You are depriving me of something that already exists, while I am just causing you to find a different way to deal with it. If you Have an issue with something that exists, then you need to find a way to deal with it without stepping in and forcing your opinions on me. I am not the one trying to force a change, you are. There are other ways for you to avoid this material without forcing me to conform to your beliefs. In other words, You are the one with a problem, you are the one trying to force a change that effects me, I'm not demanding that this comic be put in every store, but you are demanding that this comic be removed from every store. You are the one

artanis_neravar:
And before you or anyone else tries to bring in an argument relating this to porn, or other over the top subjects, they are completely different situations.

I didn't bring up the subject, but now that you have, why is this different? I realize its not the same thing as them seeing porn, but what if I don't agree that this is a subject I want young children to be exposed to? How is this different from that? While porn and homosexual marriage are not the same thing, they are two subjects that I don't think young children should be exposed to.

artanis_neravar:
Seeing two people in sexual acts is something that the kid has not been exposed to, and exposing them to it in the wrong way can alter their perception of the act, whereas two men getting married is the same exact thing as a male and a female getting married, and can be explained the same way that you explained your own marriage. And if you have never talked to your kid about marriage, or they don't know what marriage is then the cover won't bring up any questions because there would be nothing strange about it.

Again, what about those of us that don't think homosexual marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage? Why should we have children's material deal with this subject if we don't want to have them exposed to it?[/quote]Don't buy it for them, it's that simple and as I explained, sexually explicit material is different, it is eye catching, and it raises questions, especially if the child has never been exposed to anything sexual in nature, whereas marriage is such a public concept, that the children (if they know what marriage is) will see it as two people married, and may ask why two men are married, but only if it has been established that marriage is only between a man and a women. And if they don't know what marriage is then all they will see is two people holding hands and smiling.

Realitycrash:

Volf:

Realitycrash:

To put it very simple: Your opinion is of exactly equal worth as another persons. But since there aren't a lot of you (or enough of you), it matters LESS. That's how our democracy works.

My point still stands about the "depriving" comment.

No, it doesn't. We live in a capitalistic system. Peoples right to express an opinion does not equal their right to censure a private-owned corporation. You can't say "My opinion is that X-business is bad, and thus, I want it removed/censured/shut down" unless there is enough of you to either A: Get a law passed, or B: Make a capitalistic pressure (i.e voting with your wallets) large enough to get the corp to change their mind.
So, good luck.

Yes it does, the depriving comment is hypocritical and that is what I was pointing out.

artanis_neravar:
Don't buy it for them, it's that simple and as I explained, sexually explicit material is different, it is eye catching, and it raises questions, especially if the child has never been exposed to anything sexual in nature, whereas marriage is such a public concept, that the children (if they know what marriage is) will see it as two people married, and may ask why two men are married, but only if it has been established that marriage is only between a man and a women. And if they don't know what marriage is then all they will see is two people holding hands and smiling.

I'm not asking for the comics to be removed, I would ask that the comics don't cover the subject.

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
My point still stands about the "depriving" comment.

No, it doesn't. We live in a capitalistic system. Peoples right to express an opinion does not equal their right to censure a private-owned corporation. You can't say "My opinion is that X-business is bad, and thus, I want it removed/censured/shut down" unless there is enough of you to either A: Get a law passed, or B: Make a capitalistic pressure (i.e voting with your wallets) large enough to get the corp to change their mind.
So, good luck.

Yes it does, the depriving comment is hypocritical and that is what I was pointing out.

I'm sorry, how is it hypocritical? If you refer to "Well, Porn isn't allowed!", well, that's because we got laws that say "No, you can't have that". There is no law against displaying two men getting married in a way that children can see it. There is one against displaying pornographic material, though.

Okey, well, actually, when I think about it, there isn't one (as far as I know) that is against displaying racist material to children. So go ahead. If you wanna print up a neo-nazi comic and manage to get Toys R Us to shelve it, I will support your right. Then me and pretty much everyone else will get it removed by appealing to standards of decency.

What, you think gay-marriage isn't "decent standard"? Fair enough. Too bad most people are changing their views now. I.e: Your standards are shit out of luck.

No, dont. Kevin is the most boring pointless Archie character in the series, but this comic has finally given him some much needed depth.
He was once just a guy who everyone accept had no problems, no character traits, and apperently could eat more than Jughead (which is stupid because that scientificly impossible) and better looking then Archie.
So pretty much his shtick was stealing other peoples shtick.
He was a boring character and with out any conflict or problems, he could have been straight and it would have made no difference.
Alot like when Chuck first came out because of the civil rights movement. Chuck use to be boring but then they saved him and made him an artist who draws comic and cartoons. But they didnt change anything to the other black character and can anyone remember HER name? No.
so yeah Kevin = bland character not worthy of his own spinoff comic despite already having one(yet). But this may just flesh him out.

But as far as these people go. Thats just silly.

Realitycrash:

Volf:

Realitycrash:

No, it doesn't. We live in a capitalistic system. Peoples right to express an opinion does not equal their right to censure a private-owned corporation. You can't say "My opinion is that X-business is bad, and thus, I want it removed/censured/shut down" unless there is enough of you to either A: Get a law passed, or B: Make a capitalistic pressure (i.e voting with your wallets) large enough to get the corp to change their mind.
So, good luck.

Yes it does, the depriving comment is hypocritical and that is what I was pointing out.

I'm sorry, how is it hypocritical? If you refer to "Well, Porn isn't allowed!", well, that's because we got laws that say "No, you can't have that". There is no law against displaying two men getting married in a way that children can see it. There is one against displaying pornographic material, though.

Okey, well, actually, when I think about it, there isn't one (as far as I know) that is against displaying racist material to children. So go ahead. If you wanna print up a neo-nazi comic and manage to get Toys R Us to shelve it, I will support your right. Then me and pretty much everyone else will get it removed by appealing to standards of decency.

What, you think gay-marriage isn't "decent standard"? Fair enough. Too bad most people are changing their views now. I.e: Your standards are shit out of luck.

I never said it wasn't "decent", so cut with the strawman.

If anything, it's controversial.

You want something that actually has to do with the real world off the selves because you don't want to explain this thing to your kids!? If that's the reason why let them out of the house? Just keep them in there with restrictions on all forms of media and social contact!! But good for Toys R Us, if these moms are really this mad about something like this their stupid. People just this make me shake my head and face-palm.

Volf:

artanis_neravar:
Don't buy it for them, it's that simple and as I explained, sexually explicit material is different, it is eye catching, and it raises questions, especially if the child has never been exposed to anything sexual in nature, whereas marriage is such a public concept, that the children (if they know what marriage is) will see it as two people married, and may ask why two men are married, but only if it has been established that marriage is only between a man and a women. And if they don't know what marriage is then all they will see is two people holding hands and smiling.

I'm not asking for the comics to be removed, I would ask that the comics don't cover the subject.

You dislike gay marriage, so comics shouldn't cover the subject? Who died and made you king on censorship?

Volf:
I'm not asking for the comics to be removed, I would ask that the comics don't cover the subject.

Well then you are even more in the wrong, censorship is not your right. And trying to force your censorship on the rest of the country is wrong. And before you ask, you are wrong because you are trying to force censorship, I am right for opposing censor ship. That is where the difference lies. When your "right to decide what your children see" starts to affect what my kids have available to them, it starts to infringe on my same right. If:
Parent A - Wants to remove item A
Parent B - Feels their kids should be allowed to see item A

the two choices are
Item A is banned
Parent A - Their kids will never see it - They get what they want
Parent B - Their kids will never see it - They don't get what they want

Item B is not banned
Parent A - keeps their kid away from item A, their kid doesn't see it - They get what they want
Parent B - Their kid can see item A - They get what they want

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Yes it does, the depriving comment is hypocritical and that is what I was pointing out.

I'm sorry, how is it hypocritical? If you refer to "Well, Porn isn't allowed!", well, that's because we got laws that say "No, you can't have that". There is no law against displaying two men getting married in a way that children can see it. There is one against displaying pornographic material, though.

Okey, well, actually, when I think about it, there isn't one (as far as I know) that is against displaying racist material to children. So go ahead. If you wanna print up a neo-nazi comic and manage to get Toys R Us to shelve it, I will support your right. Then me and pretty much everyone else will get it removed by appealing to standards of decency.

What, you think gay-marriage isn't "decent standard"? Fair enough. Too bad most people are changing their views now. I.e: Your standards are shit out of luck.

I never said it wasn't "decent", so cut with the strawman.

If anything, it's controversial.

Alright, so it's controversial...Aaaaaand? Same logic as above apply.
So cut it short: They dislike, others like.
They want it censured, others don't.
They don't have the law on your side, or the numbers to change the law, or a valid argument based upon logic, science, math, economics or any other respected science.
So it really isn't that big of an issue.

I, for instance, wish I had the right to deprive corporations of the right to broadcast the smut they call "reality-TV", but since the masses love it, I have to suck it up, since I don't have a better argument than "It turns people into attention-loving whores that will do anything to get on TV".

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Nobody is "depriving" you of anything, but why does your opinion have more value to it then mine? I don't like something, but I just have to deal with it, but if the tables are turned, now I'm "depriving" you of something? Hypocritical much?

I didn't bring up the subject, but now that you have, why is this different? I realize its not the same thing as them seeing porn, but what if I don't agree that this is a subject I want young children to be exposed to? How is this different from that? While porn and homosexual marriage are not the same thing, they are two subjects that I don't think young children should be exposed to. Again, what about those of us that don't think homosexual marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage? Why should we have children's material deal with this subject if we don't want to have them exposed to it?

To put it very simple: Your opinion is of exactly equal worth as another persons. But since there aren't a lot of you (or enough of you), it matters LESS. That's how our democracy works.

My point still stands about the "depriving" comment.

No, it doesn't. If you don't want it for your kid, you don't have to buy it for them. If it really bothers you THAT much, you can go to a different store. You can deal with your hang-ups without changing what others can and can't do. If you try to get the store to get rid of them, that's it, it's decided for everyone.

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Yes it does, the depriving comment is hypocritical and that is what I was pointing out.

I'm sorry, how is it hypocritical? If you refer to "Well, Porn isn't allowed!", well, that's because we got laws that say "No, you can't have that". There is no law against displaying two men getting married in a way that children can see it. There is one against displaying pornographic material, though.

Okey, well, actually, when I think about it, there isn't one (as far as I know) that is against displaying racist material to children. So go ahead. If you wanna print up a neo-nazi comic and manage to get Toys R Us to shelve it, I will support your right. Then me and pretty much everyone else will get it removed by appealing to standards of decency.

What, you think gay-marriage isn't "decent standard"? Fair enough. Too bad most people are changing their views now. I.e: Your standards are shit out of luck.

I never said it wasn't "decent", so cut with the strawman.

If anything, it's controversial.

Please address his question. How is it hypocritical?

personally i think the should be protesting about the poor education of american students. when 65% or so cant pass a basic reading and writing test they sure arent going to be reading a comic

Jharry5:
When I first read the title, my heart sank, as I thought it meant that One Million Moms meant how many people had complained about this. I'm glad this isn't the case.
The way the co-CEO of the comics company handled this was brilliant.
But this piece of news begs the question; does this group have anything more important to do?

You mean like recruiting 960,000 more moms so their name doesn't sound so farcical and expose them for the crackpot fringe that they are?

Wait the US Toy R Us sell comicbook?

Anyway this is stupid, they just can't be bother to explain homosexuality to their kids already. Beside wouldn't the children maybe aware of it already in other medias or in real life?

Neverhoodian:
Huh, I wasn't aware Archie was still going after all these decades.

I don't think Toys 'R' Us has to worry. This is little more than a publicity stunt, a desperate and pathetic plea for attention by a group of people too stubborn and out of touch with reality to realize that they've already lost. They've realized that their intolerance no longer conforms with modern, progressive society. Instead of re-evaluating their stance, they lash out bitterly like a cornered animal.

12 Angry Men had the right approach for dealing with such people: ignore them. You deny them a captive audience and they have nobody to talk to but themselves.

Wow, that was powerful. I want to watch that entire movie now.

Also, Million moms are entitled to their position but I'm glad that first JC penny ignored them, and hopefully Toys'R'us will too. I don't understand whats so hard to explain to their children. It's two humans..two people that love each-other and want to make a commit to each-other.

or shoot even if you think its wrong and evil just tell them that.

Million Mom:
These are evil men who are committing sinful evil acts. They may say they are married but they are really just liars and sinners. They will burn in hell for eternity because of it.

or something like that, I'm not exactly sure what bigots tell their children about us.

Andy Chalk:
"This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions they are too dumb or prejudiced to answer properly."

Fixed.

And if the kids are too young to be exposed to same-sex marriage, then they're certainly too young for all other forms as well. Time to remove all the Barbies in wedding dresses and such.

Also, I'd like to plug a related short EGS Comics story that is about to reach its conclusion:

image

(Don't worry. Non-magnet explanation follows.)

Makes me wanna get a copy to show my support. Just to say screw you to all the intolerant people in the world(and this forum). Now how can i get a copy seeing i live outside the usa.

Lets check some websites

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Then parents can vote with their wallets and go somewhere else?
If Toys R Us released a new GI-Joe action-figure, why should we allow that? Should parents have a say too? How about an easy-bake oven? Should parents have a say there?

No? Because these things aren't "offensive"? Well, neither is homosexuality.

wrong, some people find homosexual marriage "offensive" when comparing it to heterosexual marriage, they have a right to voice their opinion just as much as anybody else.

That's all well and good.

Doesn't mean they're not wrong though.

If they don't want to expose their kids to gay they might as well just lock them in the closet.

My god! If they keep these comics in the stores the kids will get the impression that being gay is not only natural but also if they themselves are gay they shouldn't be ashamed in anyway and that people who think its wrong are bigots

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

Yes and no. If a parent objects to a certain type of material being present in their home that is their right to remove it. It is not a parent's right to remove things they disapprove of from the world. Gay people exist, and people will just have to deal with that fact. If they really want to protect their kids from the world's perceived "evils" then they will end up raising a narrow minded bigoted shut in with little in the way of social skills, and yes I have seen this exact thing happen.

Crono1973:
The people who don't accept homosexuality are now the outcasts.

Hate is a choice.

Pyrian:

Crono1973:
The people who don't accept homosexuality are now the outcasts.

Hate is a choice.

The wrong choice.

JediMB:
snipped comic page

(Don't worry. Non-magnet explanation follows.)

XD!!! the 'am i going to have to look this up on the internet?' line was great, that, and the one girl trying to get her head around the Spike/Rarity sub plot, that look was pretty good to.

OT: i see, 'group of back wards moron bitch about the passage of time, and how civilization on the whole is leaving they're archaic belief structure behind, and no one cares' pretty much sums it up i think

artanis_neravar:

Volf:
I'm not asking for the comics to be removed, I would ask that the comics don't cover the subject.

Well then you are even more in the wrong, censorship is not your right. And trying to force your censorship on the rest of the country is wrong. And before you ask, you are wrong because you are trying to force censorship, I am right for opposing censor ship. That is where the difference lies. When your "right to decide what your children see" starts to affect what my kids have available to them, it starts to infringe on my same right. If:
Parent A - Wants to remove item A
Parent B - Feels their kids should be allowed to see item A

the two choices are
Item A is banned
Parent A - Their kids will never see it - They get what they want
Parent B - Their kids will never see it - They don't get what they want

Item B is not banned
Parent A - keeps their kid away from item A, their kid doesn't see it - They get what they want
Parent B - Their kid can see item A - They get what they want

So then what about porn? Do you feel so strongly that kids should be exposed to that as well?

Pyrian:

Crono1973:
The people who don't accept homosexuality are now the outcasts.

Hate is a choice.

Eh, one could argue that this is not the case for the indoctrinated.

The best cure there is teaching everyone critical thinking.

Pyrian:

Crono1973:
The people who don't accept homosexuality are now the outcasts.

Hate is a choice.

There's plenty of that on both sides. The pro-homosexual side often refers to the other side as bigots, that's hate going the other way.

Pyrian:

Crono1973:
The people who don't accept homosexuality are now the outcasts.

Hate is a choice.

not accepting and hating something are not always the same thing.

Realitycrash:

Volf:

Realitycrash:

I'm sorry, how is it hypocritical? If you refer to "Well, Porn isn't allowed!", well, that's because we got laws that say "No, you can't have that". There is no law against displaying two men getting married in a way that children can see it. There is one against displaying pornographic material, though.

Okey, well, actually, when I think about it, there isn't one (as far as I know) that is against displaying racist material to children. So go ahead. If you wanna print up a neo-nazi comic and manage to get Toys R Us to shelve it, I will support your right. Then me and pretty much everyone else will get it removed by appealing to standards of decency.

What, you think gay-marriage isn't "decent standard"? Fair enough. Too bad most people are changing their views now. I.e: Your standards are shit out of luck.

I never said it wasn't "decent", so cut with the strawman.

If anything, it's controversial.

Alright, so it's controversial...Aaaaaand? Same logic as above apply.
So cut it short: They dislike, others like.
They want it censured, others don't.
They don't have the law on your side, or the numbers to change the law, or a valid argument based upon logic, science, math, economics or any other respected science.
So it really isn't that big of an issue.

I, for instance, wish I had the right to deprive corporations of the right to broadcast the smut they call "reality-TV", but since the masses love it, I have to suck it up, since I don't have a better argument than "It turns people into attention-loving whores that will do anything to get on TV".

ah, I see your point with the reality tv example. Fair enough

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Yes it does, the depriving comment is hypocritical and that is what I was pointing out.

I'm sorry, how is it hypocritical? If you refer to "Well, Porn isn't allowed!", well, that's because we got laws that say "No, you can't have that". There is no law against displaying two men getting married in a way that children can see it. There is one against displaying pornographic material, though.

Okey, well, actually, when I think about it, there isn't one (as far as I know) that is against displaying racist material to children. So go ahead. If you wanna print up a neo-nazi comic and manage to get Toys R Us to shelve it, I will support your right. Then me and pretty much everyone else will get it removed by appealing to standards of decency.

What, you think gay-marriage isn't "decent standard"? Fair enough. Too bad most people are changing their views now. I.e: Your standards are shit out of luck.

I never said it wasn't "decent", so cut with the strawman.

If anything, it's controversial.

No, it's not controversial, it's your ignorance and idiocy in thinking that because some people love those of the same gender they are in some way shameful that makes you want to think it is.

This comic has two people in love, if they were black it wouldn't matter, if they were teens or OAP's it wouldn't matter. Get the barge pole you have rammed up your pretentious asshole and grow the fuck up.

Children see far worse than men holding hands, they hear far worse than 'gay marriage' and they know much more about the world than you give then credit for. In the immortal words of one of the greats 'your road is rapidly fading, get out of the new if you can't lend your hand'

Your opinion is not worth the same as other peoples, if a electrician and a plumber were asked to fix a light socket you will always take the word of the electrician because he has relevant information on the subject.

The same can be said here, you have no relevant information, only ignorance and bigotry, and before you dare come along with a 'everyone's opinion is the same' in some pathetic excuse to deny the truth of the above then think of the Nazi's.

They hated gays as well, in my eyes, and the eyes of millions of other rational, educated and morally superior people around the world the Nazi's are scum and you, in your ignorance and bigotry are no better.

Kitsuna10060:

JediMB:
snipped comic page

(Don't worry. Non-magnet explanation follows.)

XD!!! the 'am i going to have to look this up on the internet?' line was great, that, and the one girl trying to get her head around the Spike/Rarity sub plot, that look was pretty good to.

I loved that Spike/Rarity bit too.

Even more so when my tweet to the creator ended up getting retweeted to his 3000+ followers. :D

Volf:

artanis_neravar:

Volf:
I'm not asking for the comics to be removed, I would ask that the comics don't cover the subject.

Well then you are even more in the wrong, censorship is not your right. And trying to force your censorship on the rest of the country is wrong. And before you ask, you are wrong because you are trying to force censorship, I am right for opposing censor ship. That is where the difference lies. When your "right to decide what your children see" starts to affect what my kids have available to them, it starts to infringe on my same right. If:
Parent A - Wants to remove item A
Parent B - Feels their kids should be allowed to see item A

the two choices are
Item A is banned
Parent A - Their kids will never see it - They get what they want
Parent B - Their kids will never see it - They don't get what they want

Item B is not banned
Parent A - keeps their kid away from item A, their kid doesn't see it - They get what they want
Parent B - Their kid can see item A - They get what they want

So then what about porn? Do you feel so strongly that kids should be exposed to that as well?

I do not, but porn is still available, I would never try to force people to stop making porn, it's not my place. And I will point you back to my earlier point about porn, and request that you drop your straw man argument and come up with something real.

Johnson McGee:
If they don't want to expose their kids to gay they might as well just lock them in the closet.

Hehe see what you did there :)

OT: All I have to say has been said to the Nazi above this post.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here