quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama
I wouldn't boycott the local cancer treatment center for their political views.

what about when Susan G. Komen cut funding to Planned Parenthood due to their political & religious views? having political/religious views are one thing, but changing who you give donated money to and who you dont cuz of those views is another thing all together.. They lost a certain amount of public support over that, peoples perception of them changed.. as I recall..

SGK Foundation made the claim that they give financial support to mammogram providers. Since PP doesn't actually provide the mammograms, PP wasn't eligible for funding, iirc. SGK lost some supporters because there was a furor put out about their not supporting PP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama
I wouldn't boycott the local cancer treatment center for their political views.

what about when Susan G. Komen cut funding to Planned Parenthood due to their political & religious views? having political/religious views are one thing, but changing who you give donated money to and who you dont cuz of those views is another thing all together.. They lost a certain amount of public support over that, peoples perception of them changed.. as I recall..

SGK Foundation made the claim that they give financial support to mammogram providers. Since PP doesn't actually provide the mammograms, PP wasn't eligible for funding, iirc. SGK lost some supporters because there was a furor put out about their not supporting PP.

PP does provide mammograms in that they refer women to mammogrophy centers just like a doctor in privare practice would.. They are also quite frequently the only provider of gynocological care for women on Medicaid.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

I dislike being asked to donate at the check-out each time I buy something, putting your customers on the spot like that, making them uncomfortable isnt good for business.. I have stopped shopping at stores that do that..

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama
I wouldn't boycott the local cancer treatment center for their political views.

what about when Susan G. Komen cut funding to Planned Parenthood due to their political & religious views? having political/religious views are one thing, but changing who you give donated money to and who you dont cuz of those views is another thing all together.. They lost a certain amount of public support over that, peoples perception of them changed.. as I recall..

SGK Foundation made the claim that they give financial support to mammogram providers. Since PP doesn't actually provide the mammograms, PP wasn't eligible for funding, iirc. SGK lost some supporters because there was a furor put out about their not supporting PP.

PP does provide mammograms in that they refer women to mammogrophy centers just like a doctor in privare practice would.. They are also quite frequently the only provider of gynocological care for women on Medicaid.

They are not providers. They are a referral service, then. If the Komen Foundation decides that only providers are to be supported, then, referral services aren't eligible. This, too, is up to neither you, nor I, to decide. It's up to the Susan G. Komen Foundation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
re: The argument about places of business and firearms.
There is a little thing called "Property Rights".
If I have a Freehold or Leasehold on property, I have a "Right of Exclusion". The only persons I cannot exclude are government employees in the execution of their duties.
I can say who or what enters or is done on my property.
If I wish to forbid firearms, I can do so whether I am the owner or tenant. You have the right to come on my property abiding by my rules or you can stay away. if you insist on doing something that I forbid, you are violating MY rights.
Remember what parents tell their rebellious teens. "My House, My rules".

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Except people like me, who gave money to SGK, do have a say. I stopped donating money the day they announced this political move.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Except people like me, who gave money to SGK, do have a say. I stopped donating money the day they announced this political move.

Nope. It isn't up to you at all. The only thing up to you is who you donate your money to. That's it. After that, it's not your money, but theirs. The get to decide after that.

Why did you stop donating to SGK? Because they cut PP out of their portfolio of who gets their money?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

re: The argument about places of business and firearms.

There is a little thing called "Property Rights".
If I have a Freehold or Leasehold on property, I have a "Right of Exclusion". The only persons I cannot exclude are government employees in the execution of their duties.
I can say who or what enters or is done on my property.
If I wish to forbid firearms, I can do so whether I am the owner or tenant. You have the right to come on my property abiding by my rules or you can stay away. if you insist on doing something that I forbid, you are violating MY rights.

Remember what parents tell their rebellious teens. "My House, My rules".

quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

Yup you have your rights and I have mine. I agree completely. You don't want folks on your property carrying firearms lawfully, then you're okay not taking their money when folks stay away. I've said that again and again and again.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

re: The argument about places of business and firearms.

There is a little thing called "Property Rights".
If I have a Freehold or Leasehold on property, I have a "Right of Exclusion". The only persons I cannot exclude are government employees in the execution of their duties.
I can say who or what enters or is done on my property.
If I wish to forbid firearms, I can do so whether I am the owner or tenant. You have the right to come on my property abiding by my rules or you can stay away. if you insist on doing something that I forbid, you are violating MY rights.

Remember what parents tell their rebellious teens. "My House, My rules".

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
This quite the disingenuous (or naive) proposal, being that the question of the day does not concern "political beliefs" per se but strong statements on social issues. There are Democratic and Republican voters who are against 'gay rights' and likewise others from both parties in favor of same. Such as with gun control, etc.

The fact is that Chic Filet does not make the best chicken sandwich in town, nor Dominos the best pizza in town, nor does Cracker Barrel make the best industrial-grade 'home cooking' in town, so the false premise proposed here doesn't come into play in any event.

Is there a clear consensus in your city or town as to who makes the best particular product or provides the best particular service?

Don't hold out on us here.

Political beliefs and social issues are often so closely intermingled that you are basically splitting hairs.

Where is your proof in the form of clinical studies that shows that Chick-Fil-A, Dominos and Cracker Barrel do not make the best of their respective products? You called it facts - you must have proof. It's not a false premise until you provide scientific proof to the contrary. I'll wait.

Consensus doesn't even really matter here. This could be a simply personal decision. You can decide that Company A is the best in town in your opinion for that particular product. Then you find out that they hold a ardently different viewpoint on some issue that is important to you. At that point would you continue to patronize them or would you look elsewhere even though you prefer their product? I thought it was a simple question. That nobody else seemed to stumble over it would indicate that I was correct in that thought.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe
One day you find out that the owner's political affiliations and beliefs are the polar opposite of yours. We're not talking about them doing anything unethical or immoral or illegal in the course of their business. Nothing like racism or prejudice. Just their basic political views. The sort of stuff we discuss here in P&R.

i reckon it would be discriminatory to take patronage from folks ya disagree wit. goes against tha pluralist principles of democracy.

Yes, it would be and its perfectly legal discrimination. That's what a boycott is...discrimination from a personal, political or economic motive. As a result it fits right in the spirit of freedom and has little to do with democracy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Except people like me, who gave money to SGK, do have a say. I stopped donating money the day they announced this political move.

Nope. It isn't up to you at all. The only thing up to you is who you donate your money to. That's it. After that, it's not your money, but theirs. The get to decide after that.
Why did you stop donating to SGK? Because they cut PP out of their portfolio of who gets their money?

The entirely right wing political reason and person behind the move.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
So no, no scientific proof that Chic Filet does not make the best chicken sandwich in Atlanta, but some small region in the city thinks not.
Along with other people in other locations of the metro area that drive past the Chic Filet to pull into the local establishments selling chicken sandwiches.
Again, thanks for humbling me.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn
So there was no inspiration in your OP from the Chic Filet brouhaha then.
None whatsoever.
Thanks for putting me in my place.

quote:


BTW, Emory University just kicked Chic Filet out of the cafeteria, and that was voted on by the students a month before the PR fiasco.

So no, no scientific proof that Chic Filet does not make the best chicken sandwich in Atlanta, but some small region in the city thinks not.
Along with other people in other locations of the metro area that drive past the Chic Filet to pull into the local establishments selling chicken sandwiches.

Again, thanks for humbling me.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

Okay so how does that prevent criminals from carrying guns onto your property and robbing you?

You're okay with folks who disagree with your policy not patronizing you, and sharing their views of your policy with the rest of the public so they can decide whether or not to patronize you. That's commendable.

quote:


I didn't say I didn't want them. One of my agents carries with permission and his permit and I also carry.

Others. No, unless I know them.

My building isn't a gun free zone for those who work there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Except people like me, who gave money to SGK, do have a say. I stopped donating money the day they announced this political move.

Nope. It isn't up to you at all. The only thing up to you is who you donate your money to. That's it. After that, it's not your money, but theirs. The get to decide after that.
Why did you stop donating to SGK? Because they cut PP out of their portfolio of who gets their money?

The entirely right wing political reason and person behind the move.

You stopped donating to SGK because they stopped giving to PP?