Even more "funny" is the fact their twitter only has 1200 followers though they claim their facebook has 44.000 members. So they may call themselves one million moms so maybe 0.03% is closer to the truth. Dunno if that 0.03% know how democracy works but 0.03% is not a majority (just a very vocal annoying big minority)Hiroshi Mishima said:I find the number of moms that actually are offended by this to be rather unbelievable, despite the current US population being over 300 million strong. In fact, this only further raises the issue.
Is one million moms even all that effective? Out of the entire US population, approximately .3% are actually offended by this? Seriously, "moms", get a little perspective.
I heard a recent interview with Alex Segura, director of publicity and marketing for Archie Comics. He claimed ever since the company got away from its 1960s stasis and made their books more progressive--more visible minority characters, Archie and Valerie's interracial kiss, Kevin Keller, the Betty and Veronica wedding issues--sales have skyrocketed. (Archie Comics is privately held and not accountable to any shareholders.) So it's pretty clear the free market has spoken on this issue.Blind Sight said:Not much else to say here really. The Moms have voiced their opinion, but the company obviously doesn't see it as a threat to their consumer base and thus are rightly ignoring the complaints.
I strongly disagree. To a young child, everything is complicated. Parents are able to explain heterosexual relationships to children: mommy and daddy are married; your aunt is going to marry that man and he'll be your uncle; your older brother has a girlfriend. Why is it so much harder to explain that two men are married, or two women are dating? You do not have to explain the plumbing of homosexual sexuality to explain homosexual relationships any more than telling your kids "mommy and daddy are married" has to immediately segue into a discussion of penises and vaginas.Mike Fang said:On the OTHER hand, sexuality can be a very complicated subject, one that I can imagine a lot of children having a tough time understanding. Explaining the birds and the bees to a child for the first time is something that needs to be approached carefully. Having to do that at the same time as explaining homosexuality is really tossing a kid into the deep end to teach him or her how to swim. So while printing the comic may not be a legitimate thing to complain about, selling it in a toy store could be seen as going a step too far. This is one issue that may have been better to have limited releases.
Well after all, math is just a theory:idarkphoenixi said:Why don't we all ban algebra too?
I mean, we don't want the poor children to get confused to we? Then we might have to actually teach them something *shudder*
Indeed it is. Shizune is awesome.Carsus Tyrell said:Still rocking Shizune eh OWO? Isn't that the one you rolled out for the hatchet guy back in the KS group?
OT: Gotta give a round of applause to Mr. Goldwater setting them straight, stupidity is still stupidity and dressing it up as the old "wahh it's my opinion" flak jacket doesn't make you less of a dunce when someone nails you with a .50 Cal Anti Moron round.
That's a fair enough point.Akalabeth said:If by call you on it, you mean throw a tantrum, make huge and unfair assumptions about their character and motivations, attack and vilify then sure. But realize that by doing so you are acting in a manner that to my mind is even more reprehensible and intolerant than the viewpoint you seek to argue against.
If people wish to disagree with this viewpoint, then sure, but try to conduct yourself with some decorum and view the matter objectively. instead of assuming things to the extent where you are effectively attacking a lie of your own creation.
Or in short, be a little mature. Or at least come to realize how your response is self-defeated and undermined by your own intolerant and subjective viewpoint.
Lets take this back a couple decades with your last statement.Volf said: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.Realitycrash said:Then parents can vote with their wallets and go somewhere else?Volf said:I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.Realitycrash said: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.Volf said:Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.
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.
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.
Rather us then 4chanSkullkid4187 said:When did the Escapist become the head of internet politics?
Since 2005, when it first launchedSkullkid4187 said:When did the Escapist become the head of internet politics?