This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
DOTD - Debate of The Day #52
Return to board index
Post by
Magician22773
Whats that other charity that traditionally stands in front of stores at Christmas time and collects donations? Oh yeah.....there isn't one.
He didn't say during Christmas time. The time of year the charities take place has nothing to do with the fact that no other Charity is allowed to stand outside Target, at ANY time of year, either.
For the record, I support the Salvation Army. I just don't see why it's a big deal if a corporation decides not to allow people to stand outside asking for donations. Again, regardless of time of year.
OK....
What is the other charity that traditionally stands outside of retail stores
at any time of the year
to collect donations?
I cannot think if a single one. The closest thing I can think if would be Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts selling cookies and popcorn, but thats not really the same thing...one is selling something, and the other is collecting donations for the needy.
Again, they packaged a turd here. They
had
to say they were banning all charities, because if they just banned the Salvation Army they would have been open to lawsuits....and it keeps the 75% of the population that can't (or won't) read between the lines from seeing their real motive. But the fact is, the only charity they banned was the Salvation Army.
And yes, its their business, so they have the right to ban them. And I have the right not to shop there, and to encourage as many people as possible not to shop there either. Have I dented their profits at all....not even a drop in the bucket. But I sure as hell fell better every time I hear someone say they are not going to shop there again...and I hear that quite often every year.
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I think the fact that this is a matter of importance to people at all illustrates the lack of priorities of the world.
Sigh. This is not once, not twice but three times my debate topics haven't been 'worthy' to you.
I'm not saying this isn't a worthy topic of debate for this thread. I think that trivial things can and should be debated here. However, on the world scope, people get seriously bothered by whether or not football refs get replays? My contention isn't that this thread has this topic, but that the world has this topic. Children are being axed to death in Syria. North Korea is a prison of fear for millions. There are enough nuclear armaments to destroy all life on earth, and possibly, all the life in the universe. The US Supreme court just came down with a decision that places enormous power at the hands of Congress. Women can decide to cut their living babies from their wombs. Genocide is a common occurrence in the world we live in. People are literally starving to death. Other people are being beheaded for their beliefs. Meanwhile, the world concerns itself with soccer. That fact makes me sad. This thread isn't the target of my ire. This is:priorities of the worldPlease don't take it personally.
Also, don't be surprised when my replies to your debate topics don't fall into line with one side or the other side. I like to think outside the box with these things. So, when you wonder if soccor should get replays, my question is why should it matter, not yes or no. When you bring up rainbow colored cookies and a boycott, I question who/if the victim is. This is not to say I am condemning you for asking these questions, or anyone for taking on a side of a debate. This is the way I think. Sorry if that offends you.
Post by
612548
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Magician22773
At my train station there's a charity collecting maybe once a week. They have to get the station's permission because it's not public property. At Target, same deal. Target used to deny that permission in all but one case, now they deny it in all cases. (Apparently - that's their story and I've seen nothing to counter it.) There's nothing wrong with disapproving of those facts as they stand, but it's not sensible to add on additional made-up facts ("it was because SA is christian") and disapprove of those.
Has the charity at your train station been there, every year, since 1891?......No
I can't provide you "proof" of why Target banned the SA. If I could, Target would be out of business, because if they actually came out and said why they did it, they would lose business so fast it would make your head spin.
You can have your opinion of why they did it, and I can have mine. They are both just that...opinions. You have just as much factual basis for your claim that they were just trying to be "fair" as I do that they were trying to be policialy correct, while still raking in billions of dollars on the season that they don't wish to promote.
Hell, regardless of why they dont allow them, I still would not want to support a business that refuses to allow a respected, nationally recognized charity the priveledge of standing at their door to fund a charity that provides so much to people in need. If you see nothing wrong with it, than that is fine. Hopefully you will never need their services, or know someone that does, in my
opinion
, you don't deserve them.
Post by
MyTie
My contention isn't that this thread has this topic, but that the world has this topic. Children are being axed to death in Syria. North Korea is a prison of fear for millions. There are enough nuclear armaments to destroy all life on earth, and possibly, all the life in the universe. The US Supreme court just came down with a decision that places enormous power at the hands of Congress. Women can decide to cut their living babies from their wombs. Genocide is a common occurrence in the world we live in. People are literally starving to death. Other people are being beheaded for their beliefs. Meanwhile,
the world concerns itself with a cooky brand supporting gay rights
. That fact makes me sad.Couldn't have said it better myself.
Post by
Magician22773
My contention isn't that this thread has this topic, but that the world has this topic. Children are being axed to death in Syria. North Korea is a prison of fear for millions. There are enough nuclear armaments to destroy all life on earth, and possibly, all the life in the universe. The US Supreme court just came down with a decision that places enormous power at the hands of Congress. Women can decide to cut their living babies from their wombs. Genocide is a common occurrence in the world we live in. People are literally starving to death. Other people are being beheaded for their beliefs. Meanwhile,
some company wants to expand their brand by making some silly cookie to promote gay rights
. That fact makes me sad.
Thought I would fix your post to show my stance.
Post by
MyTie
My contention isn't that this thread has this topic, but that the world has this topic. Children are being axed to death in Syria. North Korea is a prison of fear for millions. There are enough nuclear armaments to destroy all life on earth, and possibly, all the life in the universe. The US Supreme court just came down with a decision that places enormous power at the hands of Congress. Women can decide to cut their living babies from their wombs. Genocide is a common occurrence in the world we live in. People are literally starving to death. Other people are being beheaded for their beliefs. Meanwhile,
some company wants to expand their brand by making some silly cookie to promote gay rights
. That fact makes me sad.
I quite agree.
You know, you two should be careful. If you refuse to take one side or the other, people don't even want you in the thread, as they cannot understand you.As with any other thread, MyTie, you're free not to post if it's not important to you. Don't troll others just because you're not interested in this particular topic.Either love the cookies or boycott them. Any questioning the importance of these actions is "trolling".
Post by
OverZealous
With respect, MyTie, you almost make it seem like we should
only
care about the most important things in the world, and nothing else ever. I know that might not be what you're trying to say, but it's what you come across as trying to say. I believe they should be our priorities, definetly, but people need to concern themselves with lesser matters as well. It's not that they don't care about genocides (except maybe in some cases), but because they happen to think other matters are at least somewhat important. I think that's why some people are irritated by your responses; they make it seem as if almost every topic is completely unworthy of debate.
For example, I am outraged when someone is, in my somewhat experienced eyes, disqualified unjustly in any swimming competition, enough to write angry mails to the coach in charge of the competition, but that does not in the slightest mean I don't care about people being axed in Syria.
Post by
MyTie
With respect, MyTie, you almost make it seem like we should
only
care about the most important things in the world, and nothing else ever. I know that might not be what you're trying to say, but it's what you come across as trying to say. I believe they should be our priorities, definetly, but people need to concern themselves with lesser matters as well. It's not that they don't care about genocides (except maybe in some cases), but because they happen to think other matters are at least somewhat important.
For example, I am outraged when someone is, in my somewhat experienced eyes, disqualified unjustly in any swimming competition, enough to write angry mails to the coach in charge of the competition, but that does not in the slightest mean I don't care about people being axed in Syria.
Agreed.
Post by
301983
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Either love the cookies or boycott them. Any questioning the importance of these actions is "trolling".
OZ said it best - it might not be your intention, but that's how it comes across. I know you can try better.
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Ksero
There are bigger things to worry about if you're trying to make soccer fair, if they can make detection systems for when someone fakes an injury i'll be happy.
Post by
gamerunknown
We know he didn't mean it.
It was definitely realpolitik, but I think his previous comments saying it was a tough issue were the
insincere ones
.
For the record, I support the Salvation Army.
After
this
?
Post by
Squishalot
Realistically, a charity which refuses to help homosexuals isn't terribly much different from those charities which are set up to help a particular gender (e.g. helping widows with young children, helping pregnant teenagers, helping men with depression, etc.). They're still effectively focusing their charitable efforts to a broad section of society, at the expense of the rest.
You can't admire their discriminatory views, perhaps, but you have to admit that at least they're trying to help people in the first instance.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
gamerunknown
Ever heard of a gender specific charity spokesperson claiming the opposite gender deserves death? Or, to use another analogy, that they ought to undergo gender reassignment therapy in order to receive their help?
I also thought of another reason Target may not have wanted to cater to Salvation Army: explicitly refusing certain other charities would be seen as just as discriminatory, while allowing all charities might cause PR problems - if Islamic Relief turns up for instance.
Post by
OverZealous
There are bigger things to worry about if you're trying to make soccer fair, if they can make detection systems for when someone fakes an injury i'll be happy.
Wait, you mean there are actually times when the football players
don't
fake?
Post by
Squishalot
Ever heard of a gender specific charity spokesperson claiming the opposite gender deserves death? Or, to use another analogy, that they ought to undergo gender reassignment therapy in order to receive their help?
Oh for sure, the guy was out of line. But I don't think that's an official Salvation Army line, despite their general view of following the Biblical rules around homosexuality.
There are bigger things to worry about if you're trying to make soccer fair, if they can make detection systems for when someone fakes an injury i'll be happy.
Wait, you mean there are actually times when the football players
don't
fake?
Lawl, too true that!
Link for effect
.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.