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
 

Mortai Gravesend:

Volf:

Mortai Gravesend:

Yes, like let's cater to racists and not show interracial marriage. Oh wait a minute maybe we should avoid that example because it just goes to show that the only reason behind that kind of thinking is prejudice.

Follow DailonCmann's lead and refer to comment #162

Your reasoning for why you withdrew it didn't seem to address the criticism I made.

Easy man. I disagree with his position too, but he's actually been fairly reasonable and courteous. Besides which, you're getting into the part of it where you aren't likely to change his opinion, just let it die.

I dont think kids buy Archie comics any more, so this whole fuss is completely irrelevant.

Skullkid4187:
When did the Escapist become the head of internet politics?

Long before they decided to use this wannabe facebook design for the site.

Avatar Roku:

Mortai Gravesend:

Volf:
Follow DailonCmann's lead and refer to comment #162

Your reasoning for why you withdrew it didn't seem to address the criticism I made.

Easy man. I disagree with his position too, but he's actually been fairly reasonable and courteous. Besides which, you're getting into the part of it where you aren't likely to change his opinion, just let it die.

I'm not particularly fond of prejudice, no matter how nicely someone coats it and presents it.

Mortai Gravesend:

Volf:

Mortai Gravesend:

Yes, like let's cater to racists and not show interracial marriage. Oh wait a minute maybe we should avoid that example because it just goes to show that the only reason behind that kind of thinking is prejudice.

Follow DailonCmann's lead and refer to comment #162

Your reasoning for why you withdrew it didn't seem to address the criticism I made.

Go look for a fight/debate somewhere else, I'm not debating on a point I already retracted.

Volf:

Mortai Gravesend:

Volf:
Follow DailonCmann's lead and refer to comment #162

Your reasoning for why you withdrew it didn't seem to address the criticism I made.

Go look for a fight/debate somewhere else, I'm not debating on a point I already retracted.

Oh, so you're not for treating homosexual relationships as any different? Well that's news. You know, that being the point I took issue with.

Jon Goldwater:
...and he will live a happy, long life free of prejudice, hate and narrow-minded people.

This man may now be my new King of Smartasses for that. That was well done.

Also, dammit, people. Do you lot actually need to have an argument over this story? Cripes.

Mortai Gravesend:

Oh, so you're not for treating homosexual relationships as any different? Well that's news. You know, that being the point I took issue with.

...lol. Mortai Gravesend, ....go..somewhere..else..for..a..fight..ok?

Adam Jensen:
Children are being exposed to guns in toy stores every day. Can you spell 'hypocritical moronic bigots'?

Guns don't kill people, comics about interracial gay marriage kills people apparently.

Volf:

Mortai Gravesend:

Oh, so you're not for treating homosexual relationships as any different? Well that's news. You know, that being the point I took issue with.

...lol. Mortai Gravesend, ....go..somewhere..else..for..a..fight..ok?

Hey, if you don't want me to point out the innumerable flaws with your post, don't keep replying. Otherwise I'll keep pointing out whatever bigotry, red herring, or false statement you come up with.

Mortai Gravesend:

Avatar Roku:

Mortai Gravesend:

Your reasoning for why you withdrew it didn't seem to address the criticism I made.

Easy man. I disagree with his position too, but he's actually been fairly reasonable and courteous. Besides which, you're getting into the part of it where you aren't likely to change his opinion, just let it die.

I'm not particularly fond of prejudice, no matter how nicely someone coats it and presents it.

Me neither, but this argument is done. Besides which, what do you hope to accomplish? You're not going to convince him, especially not while being so confrontational, and he's not even interested in arguing more. Just let it go, save it up for the gay marriage thread that will inevitably be up tomorrow.

"This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions from their children on topics that are too complicated for them to understand. "

Is it too complicated? Is it? Or are you just too lazy to sit down and talk with your kids? Is it that hard to say "Sometimes when a boy and a girl love each other very much" and switch out the genders as needed?

Mortai Gravesend:

Volf:

Mortai Gravesend:

Oh, so you're not for treating homosexual relationships as any different? Well that's news. You know, that being the point I took issue with.

...lol. Mortai Gravesend, ....go..somewhere..else..for..a..fight..ok?

Hey, if you don't want me to point out the innumerable flaws with your post, don't keep replying. Otherwise I'll keep pointing out whatever bigotry, red herring, or false statement you come up with.

I suggest you take Avatar Roku's advice.

Volf:

Realitycrash:

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

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

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

Bollocks.

It's entirely up to the owner of the shop.

You could make an argument that some parents don't want to see their children exposed to toy guns, action figures or flashy fucking colours.

That means precipice nothing, it's down to the store to decide what they think is appropriate for them to stock. If the one million 12,000 mothers have such an issue with that. Take it to a court, good luck trying to convince anyone of sound mind that same sex relations are something children shouldn't know about.

Abandon4093:

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

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

Bollocks.

It's entirely up to the owner of the shop.

You could make an argument that some parents don't want to see their children exposed to toy guns, action figures or flashy fucking colours.

That means precipice nothing, it's down to the store to decide what they think is appropriate for them to stock. If the one million 12,000 mothers have such an issue with that. Take it to a court, good luck trying to convince anyone of sound mind that same sex relations are something children shouldn't know about.

Please read earlier on this page. He's retracted that.

Yup another "moral" group that seriously.. needs to grow up
There is allot wrong with these "morality" groups. For instance they have to lie.. if you have to lie to make a point your point is not valid.

But well it is how american society is changing. The religious people are stirring as they feel the waves of change.. they know they are on the losing side of what is coming.

Abandon4093:

Bollocks.

It's entirely up to the owner of the shop.

You could make an argument that some parents don't want to see their children exposed to toy guns, action figures or flashy fucking colours.

That means precipice nothing, it's down to the store to decide what they think is appropriate for them to stock. If the one million 12,000 mothers have such an issue with that. Take it to a court, good luck trying to convince anyone of sound mind that same sex relations are something children shouldn't know about.

Oh joy! Another person to fall in line with DailonCmann and Mortai Gravesend as they march back to comment #162

UGH... are we really having this discussion? Let me put it how i see it, for a few pages after this I will be quoted a bit, then I will never be seen here again, K?

Homosexuality does not harm anyone.

There, that's my entire opinion. It doesn't personally harm me, and i can actually brush off any "advances" that are made.

Everyone who is against homosexuality is just afraid that some day a homosexual will make an advance towards them, its the only legitimate reason to dislike homosexuality. By the way, I don't care what your religion says on the matter, odds are it isn't my religion and I don't follow its tenants.

That's the root of the problem isn't it? Some people cant accept that some people don't share their beliefs. In their eyes, the people who don't agree just "don't understand" and need to be "made to understand". I know that pretty much everyone I know doesn't share my beliefs, and can accept that.

One side note, can anyone actually tell MY religion from this? Just curious.

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.

Doesn't work. Look at the West Boro Baptist church.

In a twisted way, they're almost admirable. They just won't give up.

Mortai Gravesend:

Hey, if you don't want me to point out the innumerable flaws with your post, don't keep replying. Otherwise I'll keep pointing out whatever bigotry, red herring, or false statement you come up with.

Stop being so juvenile with this crap. Volf's maintained a mature demeanor throughout the entire debate, I strongly disagree with him but he's conveyed his points in a polite matter. You, however, are acting like a condescending ass. Regardless of your position on the issue acting like that undermines your argument and makes you seem petty. Let it be.

Realitycrash:

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

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.

It's not about homosexuality, it's about sexuality in general. Kids do not understand the idea of sex and until they do there's no need for them to be made aware of it regardless of orientation. There's nothing offensive about homosexuality but kids aren't ready to learn about homosexuality anymore then they are ready to learn about the ins and outs (heh) of heterosexual sex. You're thinking about this in an adult/teen manner, not a kids manner.

Also, the dude has an opinion, don't ram yours down his throat.

Good to see no one is interested in backing down or even giving these idiots the time of day. The time for such absurd, short-sighted, and flat-out hateful sentiment is over, and what remains in this country may try to take anyone in arm's reach down with it, but it will breed no more.

...damn, I used to read Archie all the time, and now that I'm grown up, they start doing cool stuff like this. When I was younger, the best we got for coolness was lame spy stories and a crossover with the Ninja Turtles.

SaneAmongInsane:

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.

Doesn't work. Look at the West Boro Baptist church.

In a twisted way, they're almost admirable. They just won't give up.

Well, it hasn't worked on them because we haven't tried it. Have you seen those counter protests?

I can't blame the counter-protestors though; it's not helping in the long run, but god damn is it satisfying now.

Thanks One Thousand Million Moms! Without you, I wouldn't have known that this exist. I'll be sure to buy and keep this issue for my yet unborn children.

One Million homophobic moms would be entirely more accurate, and i'm almost certain the the (Pinky to the corner of my mouth) "one million" moms is a load of shit too, I've found sources claiming that their facebook page has 44,000 members...but if it did it doesn't any more as it seems to have been deleted.

Plenty of Anti-onemillionmoms pages though, which probably equal (in total) the same amount of members, if not more.

Anyway, let them hate, vocally, I hope they pursue other highly publicized campaigns; People, in general, suck at progression unless there is something tangible to push against and there is nothing quite like a common enemy to galvanize the masses.

I'm willing to bet all these mums have an IQ under 100.

So parents can't get off their ass' to explain to their kids about gay marriage, but they will to fight against it. What kind of dumb %#^ is this.

I also don't see many parents fighting against the over sexualization of some kids toys. So they get bent out of shape on something thats lost all sanctity (Not due to gay marriage but all the divorces). But they're fine with their little girl being a whore.

....... I for one await our new alien or robot overlord! 2012 for best year ever cause I'm tired of hearing this shit.

Volf:
snip

Avatar Roku:
snip

Yea, because it's on everyone else to read an entire thread for the possibility that someone retracted a dumb comment they made 6 pages ago.

You don't want people responding to it, go edit it out. That's what the functions there for. Correcting the stupid in your posts.

Abandon4093:

Volf:
snip

Avatar Roku:
snip

Yea, because it's on everyone else to read an entire thread for the possibility that someone retracted a dumb comment they made 6 pages ago.

You don't want people responding to it, go edit it out. That's what the functions there for. Correcting the stupid in your posts.

Or you don't jump to conclusions and actually realize when seeing a thread that is six pages long that it is quite possible that the opinions that people have at the beginning of the thread might not be the same ones they have at the end of the thread.

Volf:

Abandon4093:

Volf:
snip

Avatar Roku:
snip

Yea, because it's on everyone else to read an entire thread for the possibility that someone retracted a dumb comment they made 6 pages ago.

You don't want people responding to it, go edit it out. That's what the functions there for. Correcting the stupid in your posts.

Or you don't jump to conclusions and actually realize when seeing a thread that is six pages long that it is quite possible that the opinions that people have at the beginning of the thread might not be the same ones they have at the end of the thread.

LMAO

... Seriously? That's how you're going to play this?

You said something stupid, if you don't want people to responding that go put an addendum at the end of the dumb post. It's not on anyone else to provide you with the benefit of the doubt.

Abandon4093:

Volf:

Abandon4093:

Yea, because it's on everyone else to read an entire thread for the possibility that someone retracted a dumb comment they made 6 pages ago.

You don't want people responding to it, go edit it out. That's what the functions there for. Correcting the stupid in your posts.

Or you don't jump to conclusions and actually realize when seeing a thread that is six pages long that it is quite possible that the opinions that people have at the beginning of the thread might not be the same ones they have at the end of the thread.

LMAO

... Seriously? That's how you're going to play this?

You said something stupid, if you don't want people responding that go put an addendum at the end of the dumb post. It's not on anyone else to provide you with the benefit of the doubt.

I expressed an opinion, and later retracted it, you jumped in a middle of a thread and your surprised that the original conversation had concluded. I guess I can't expect much from you.

Ok The claim that this is going to corrupt youth is 100% completely without merit. Not because exposure to homosexual relations dont bring up inappropriate questions in children, or because homosexuality is just as natural as any other sexual predilection. Its because no child anywhere within the last 50 friggen years has picked up an Archie Comic book. Not even by accident or to move it out of the way of something they want to see. Seriously. its Archie. Honestly im surprised they actually have a non bubblegum wrapper format since the 1980s.

However, there is a degree of merit of a parent wanting to be able to take their child into a public place and not have their children directly exposed to something they didnt even take notice of. Im sorry but last I checked parents still have the right (though its been severely diminished) to raise their children the way they wish. I get very tired of seeing people who view anything less than pure acceptance and love toward homosexuality as an automatic label of ignorance or narrow mindedness. Not wanting to see homosexuality on every tv show, film, kids show and any other form of inappropriate and gross over representation is not ignorance or intolerance. Calling these people as such because they do not agree with your personal world view does not make it factual.

So yeah, lets try to act like adults and not call people names simply because they dont think like you do, because, yeah, thats fairly intolerant and incredibly hypocritical.

Volf:

Abandon4093:

Volf:
Or you don't jump to conclusions and actually realize when seeing a thread that is six pages long that it is quite possible that the opinions that people have at the beginning of the thread might not be the same ones they have at the end of the thread.

LMAO

... Seriously? That's how you're going to play this?

You said something stupid, if you don't want people responding that go put an addendum at the end of the dumb post. It's not on anyone else to provide you with the benefit of the doubt.

I expressed an opinion, and later retracted it, you jumped in a middle of a thread and your surprised that the original conversation had concluded. I guess I can't expect much from you.

I like how you're trying to play this one as if you've got any kind of high ground here. Moral or intellectual.

Not surprised the conversations over, at all. Surprised you think it's alright to expect people to comb through an entire thread to make sure YOU retracted YOUR stupid.

Like I said, it's on you to make sure people know you retracted the opinion. No one else.

But you don't get that or you don't want to admit that you get that. So I guess I can't really expect much from you.

More junk to fuel the Escapist hate machine. Again, why is this front page news? No I don't agree with the million moms but (without knowing anything about the Archie Comics) this seems like just an attention grab from the comic that was successful.

Abandon4093:

Volf:

Abandon4093:

LMAO

... Seriously? That's how you're going to play this?

You said something stupid, if you don't want people responding that go put an addendum at the end of the dumb post. It's not on anyone else to provide you with the benefit of the doubt.

I expressed an opinion, and later retracted it, you jumped in a middle of a thread and your surprised that the original conversation had concluded. I guess I can't expect much from you.

I like how you're trying to play this one as if you've got any kind of high ground here. Moral or intellectual.

Not surprised the conversations over, at all. Surprised you think it's alright to expect people to comb through an entire thread to make sure YOU retracted YOUR stupid.

Like I said, it's on you to make sure people know you retracted the opinion. No one else.

But you don't get that or you don't want to admit that you get that. So I guess I can't really expect much from you.

Yeah its not to much to ask for you to follow the conversation if you want to comment about something I said, I'm done.

Volf:

Abandon4093:

Volf:
Or you don't jump to conclusions and actually realize when seeing a thread that is six pages long that it is quite possible that the opinions that people have at the beginning of the thread might not be the same ones they have at the end of the thread.

LMAO

... Seriously? That's how you're going to play this?

You said something stupid, if you don't want people responding that go put an addendum at the end of the dumb post. It's not on anyone else to provide you with the benefit of the doubt.

I expressed an opinion, and later retracted it, you jumped in a middle of a thread and your surprised that the original conversation had concluded. I guess I can't expect much from you.

People have the right to respond to a post that they disagree with. If your retracted your statement then it is your obligation to go back and change it, otherwise be ready for people to keep quoting your controversial 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