#269758 - 22/11/2005 23:05
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: canuckInOR]
|
addict
Registered: 25/06/2002
Posts: 456
|
Quote:
what's more common is a 7-11 convenience store, which are more noted for selling liquor, porn mags, junk-food, and slurpees, than they are for their fresh produce (which some do actually carry).
Here's a nitpick which is somehow still on topic.
7-11 quit selling porn about 20 years ago.
That's because Southland corporation has an ethical issue with that.
So you can buy Maxim, or some Lowrider magazines, or the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue if you really need to see some nearly topless women.
But, on ethical grounds, they don't sell Playboy or anything harder.
Also, I seem to recall that 7-11 does not sell liquor, only beer. (and lately, wine)
And they don't even sell beer in certain markets (based on local regulations).
They do sell junk food (and lots of it).
And of course the Slurpees, which I think is a 7-11 trademark (so everyone else has to sell "Squishees," or "Slushees," or some such).
Of course, your comment is dead-on accurate for "24 hour convenience store" used in the generic sense, where you can stock up on your whiskey, Hustler, and Cheetos all at the same time (along with condoms, cigarettes, and sometimes a singing statue of Elvis).
I just wanted to point out that 7-11's parent corporation decided to take an ethical stand against selling porn. At least in the south and west. I can't remember if their ethics are "more flexible" in the northeast.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269759 - 23/11/2005 04:46
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: canuckInOR]
|
addict
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 510
Loc: NY
|
Quote:
Racial bigotry is based on percieved stereotypes and skin colour, which have nothing to do with whether a person is human -- regardless of anyone's convictions.
I'm sure some people will beg to differ with you on this point.
Quote:
The other boils down to when does "life" begin -- because it's pretty clear that wantonly taking life is wrong..........I don't know, but I think it's wrong --
Yeah, you see, there's this fundamental thing that everyone on this board has pretty much missed here. I'll give you a hint...It''s so obvious it causes me physical pain that it's been overlooked for so long on so many threads...everyone playing along at home, roll up a newspaper or magazine and whack yourself about the head a bit and yell this at the top of your lungs while you do it.... (we need a large text button so I can yell more effectively)
Ya see, there's this funny thing about human life. IT JUST DOESN'T PROGRESS BEYOND THE BLASTCYST PHASE WITHOUT A UTERUS TO IMPLANT INTO. EVEN IF IT'S ONE OF THOSE IVF ZYGOTES COOKED UP IN A LAB. UTERUS, FREEZER, OR DEATH. NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE. AND THERE'S THIS FUNNY THING ABOUT A WORKING UTERUS, IT ONLY COMES PACKAGED IN A FULL GROWN FEMALE HUMAN BEING. ONE ENTITLED TO FULL CONTROL OVER HER BODY.
Now, ya see, you're making yet another mistake here. You're assuming the anti-choice rapist behind the pharmacy counter will step aside and let the other pharmacist without an objection to contraception do the job (and no, it's not just plan b and the likes, some pharmacists refuse to dispense regular ol birth control pills, sometimes because they're against birth control, some think it's only unmarried harlots who shouldn't have them and no givey pills without seeing spouse, and some who are so entrenched in the lying rape culture of the anti-choice movement, say they cause "chemical abortions", again unproven, even with 40 years of research on oral contaceptives to look at.) And if you do a little googling, you'll find many a story of prescriptions confiscated, berating the patron, and all manner of common anti-choicer terrorist tricks. (Go watch an abortion clinic stocked with "sidewalk counselors" one day, the pharmacy counter is just another bully pulpit for their gutter values and rapist agenda) All of these actions involve abuse of power to force your will onto someone else's body. This isn't forcing someone who believes porno is morally wrong to edit a lesbo movie. It's a hell of a lot deeper than that. Pregnancy causes permanent alteration of the body, whether it is carried to term or not. Carrying a pregnancy to term is a very public thing (and some people get all wierd and touchy feely toward pregnant women, even if they're total strangers. We should let pregnant women carry whacking sticks for use on these people). Denying a woman contraception based on your belief is possibly forcing her to endure an unwanted pregnancy for your morals, which may well just lead to that abortion they wanted to prevent anyway, only you might get the double harassing fundie rapist effect. Once at the pharmacy counter, once again (or maybe two or three times, depends on how many BS roadblock laws your municipality has) on the walk into the clinic. Now, does the woman denied the contaceptives get the right to castrate the pharmacist because she thinks that's an appropriate punishment for rape? I'm guessing few people will agree with that, because that's like wrong and stuff. But for anti-choicer to subject her to unwanted intervention with her fertility, fine and dandy.
But don't just take my word for it, check out Pharmacists for Life International,feel the love and respect for female patient as person. This is the largest organization pushing for these refusal clauses. It's the cunt for breeding, cunt for fucking, person after you fill those roles mentality.
You don't want to do a job, step aside and let someone who's willing do it. No one owes you a job any more than you owe some random dude on the street a cut of your wages.
Quote:
Interesting -- I've never had to deal with Plan B, so I admit to not knowing a thing about it.
I'll bet you've got no preference in brand of tampons either, and your underwear drawer has a lot less satin and lace than mine (unless you're kinky like that). What we've got here is someone with no knowledge of the subject and no vested interest in it running off with an opinion. Might I ask what even makes you entitled to having one regarding something that is so not about you?
Quote:
My above statements were made while considering the new abortifactant drug that Jim was talking about, which is what I thought Bit was referring to, and which I think is a bit elevated from "regular" birth control (which I'll define as anything that prevents your medical definition of pregnant).
So you're confused and running off confused and spouting an opinion on it. Even tho the easily googled plan b was specifically mentioned.
Two more points:
[list]
Not my definition of pregnant. It is the one the American college of Obstetrics and gynecology (i think i remembered that name right) and some other respectable medical organizations use.
Chemically induced abortion with the drugs WagonBoy mentioned is not new. As a matter of fact, I don't know of any doctor that would write a script for that unsupervised, and I can go buy a few scripts for whatyever the hell prescription drug I want to use recreationally, from a licensed medical doctor (some with good reputations even!) at 1:00AM. Fer chrissakes, some of 'em will even deliver.
More clarification:
There are two common methods for performing a medical abortion.
The first procedure, using a drug called Mifeprex, also known as RU486, is taken orally in a doctor's office and followed two days later by another medication called misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract, resulting in the expulsion of the pregnancy tissue.
The second procedure, using a drug called Methotrexate, includes an initial injection, followed one week later by misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract, resulting in the expulsion of the pregnancy tissue.
As for unchecked sale and use of these drugs as an alternative? There's about a 10% failure rate. They cause severe birth defects. At best, it'll be thalidomide babies redux, but I bet it will be far worse than that. We don't have much to study, as women who are given these drugs agree before hand to surgical abortion in case of failure.
Quote:
personally, I don't care about your pussy, let alone what you do with it. Not having a pussy, I can't possibly have the same perspective you do.
Yet you've offered uninformed opinions on it, and expounded on what rights people who have beliefs differing from it's owner have to enforce those beliefs on women, and how they should be protected while doing it. And I bet you didn't even realize it, and don't see anything wrong with it. Hell, everyone's got rights to operate within their morals, even if those morals come at the expense of something so personal and dear as the rights of another to control their own body. I mean, they're not real people, just baby factories.
If I recall correctly, you're a white christian male, aren't you? (And that's only half snark in that question)
_________________________
Heather
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." -Susan B Anthony
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269761 - 23/11/2005 08:22
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: Heather]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 13/09/1999
Posts: 2401
Loc: Croatia
|
It's difficult to argue with the view that everyone is entitled to full control over her own body (and I agree with that view). However, that does not seem to be universal standpoint: for example, I am not allowed to ruin my body with so-called controlled substances.
Given your opinion that pregnancy is exclusively the business of the owner of womb in case, do you think that the provider of other half of genetic material, the father, has any say? Does he have any responsibility ('the society' certainly hold he has)?
_________________________
Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Q#5196
MkII #080000376, 18GB green
MkIIa #040103247, 60GB blue
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269762 - 23/11/2005 14:22
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: bonzi]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
It's not intended as a grocery. They're, colloquially, "convenience stores" and mostly started as adjunct to gas stations -- just somewhere to pick up a snack while you were stopped already. They have no interest in selling things that don't have a basically infinite shelf life.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269763 - 23/11/2005 17:44
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: wfaulk]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 12/02/2002
Posts: 2298
Loc: Berkeley, California
|
Quote:
They have no interest in selling things that don't have a basically infinite shelf life.
Mmmm. Infinite shelf life hot dogs. They also have very little interest in selling things that you aren't going to use/eat right then. Something like 90% of the things they sell are consumed within 10 minutes. (I made that up, but the real statistic is similar)
Matthew
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269764 - 23/11/2005 18:51
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Have you seen those hot dogs? They probably have a longer shelf life than the overpriced quarts of motor oil that they sell. Actually, they're probably cooking in some of that motor oil.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269765 - 23/11/2005 19:38
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: wfaulk]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 12/02/2002
Posts: 2298
Loc: Berkeley, California
|
Quote:
Have you seen those hot dogs?
Many a time, but I've certainly never eaten one. They frighten me.
Matthew
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269766 - 23/11/2005 23:51
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: Heather]
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
AND THERE'S THIS FUNNY THING ABOUT A WORKING UTERUS, IT ONLY COMES PACKAGED IN A FULL GROWN FEMALE HUMAN BEING. ONE ENTITLED TO FULL CONTROL OVER HER BODY.
How is a baby part of your body? It depends on your body to live, but itīs not part of it. It takes two people make a child.
It wouldnīt be ok for a Siamese twin to have a doctor surgically alter one of itīs organs so that the other twin dies. Both twins should have a say in it. So shouldnīt your baby have a say in whether or not it lives or dies? I donīt think I can find any person who would say "I wish my mom would have aborted me." Yet, there are thousands of abortions everyday.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#269767 - 24/11/2005 01:19
Re: Wal-Mart - The High Cost of Low Price
[Re: Heather]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Quote:
Racial bigotry is based on percieved stereotypes and skin colour, which have nothing to do with whether a person is human -- regardless of anyone's convictions.
I'm sure some people will beg to differ with you on this point.
Of course, and I'm not oblivious to that fact -- I don't believe moral absolutism exists -- but society, as a whole, has at least progressed to that point.
Quote:
Quote:
The other boils down to when does "life" begin -- because it's pretty clear that wantonly taking life is wrong..........I don't know, but I think it's wrong --
Yeah, you see, there's this fundamental thing that everyone on this board has pretty much missed here.
No, you assume everyone on this board his missed it.
Quote:
Ya see, there's this funny thing about human life. IT JUST DOESN'T PROGRESS BEYOND THE BLASTCYST PHASE WITHOUT A UTERUS TO IMPLANT INTO. EVEN IF IT'S ONE OF THOSE IVF ZYGOTES COOKED UP IN A LAB. UTERUS, FREEZER, OR DEATH. NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE. AND THERE'S THIS FUNNY THING ABOUT A WORKING UTERUS, IT ONLY COMES PACKAGED IN A FULL GROWN FEMALE HUMAN BEING. ONE ENTITLED TO FULL CONTROL OVER HER BODY.
Read what I've written very, very carefully, and you will note that I've never, ever argued against that.
Quote:
Now, ya see, you're making yet another mistake here.
No, you're making an assumption about my assumptions.
Quote:
You're assuming the anti-choice rapist behind the pharmacy counter will step aside and let the other pharmacist without an objection to contraception do the job
I didn't fall off the turnip truck, thanks. I'm making an assumption that an ethical pharmacist against [insert item here] would do that, yes, but I'm not making the assumption that all would -- had you actually read my posts carefully, you might have noticed that clarification.
I'm less than impressed that you accuse me of making assumptions, without seeking to clarify what might just have been an unclearly written comment.
Quote:
And if you do a little googling, you'll find many a story of prescriptions confiscated, berating the patron, and all manner of common anti-choicer terrorist tricks.
I don't consider that the behaviour of an ethical pharmacist who is against such things.
Quote:
Denying a woman contraception based on your belief [screed snipped]
Did you actually read what I wrote, or did you just skim it, and fill in the blanks with what you think I meant, because part of what I wrote doesn't conform to your ideal?
Quote:
You don't want to do a job, step aside and let someone who's willing do it.
Exactly -- that's what I'm advocating. The only difference is, I'm not saying a pharmacist shouldn't have to out-and-out quit, if there is someone else available (and I'm not talking about "at the pharmacy on the other side of town", but "behind the same counter") that can fill the prescription.
All that stuff you mentioned above about customers getting harangued is just plain bad customer service. Any pharmacist that engages in that sort of behaviour should be fired -- not allowed to quit, fired -- regardless of whether it's over birth control, or acne medicine.
Quote:
Quote:
Interesting -- I've never had to deal with Plan B, so I admit to not knowing a thing about it.
I'll bet you've got no preference in brand of tampons either, and your underwear drawer has a lot less satin and lace than mine (unless you're kinky like that).
Not particularly, no. 
Quote:
What we've got here is someone with no knowledge of the subject and no vested interest in it running off with an opinion. Might I ask what even makes you entitled to having one regarding something that is so not about you?
Oh, I'm sorry -- I didn't realize that only women were necessary for reproduction, and were, therefore, the only ones able to educate themselves about the topic, and form an opinion.
Quote:
[snip]
- Not my definition of pregnant.
Recognized.
Quote:
Quote:
personally, I don't care about your pussy, let alone what you do with it. Not having a pussy, I can't possibly have the same perspective you do.
Yet you've offered uninformed opinions on it, and expounded on what rights people who have beliefs differing from it's owner have to enforce those beliefs on women, and how they should be protected while doing it. And I bet you didn't even realize it, and don't see anything wrong with it.
No... I think you've been reading *way* more into what I was trying to say, than what I was saying (or, at least, thinking), which is simply that I think it is possible to ethically deal with moral issues like this in the workplace, without forcing a pharmacist (or rapist, if you prefer your needlessly inflammatory language) to quit.
Quote:
And I bet you didn't even realize it, and don't see anything wrong with it. Hell, everyone's got rights to operate within their morals, even if those morals come at the expense of something so personal and dear as the rights of another to control their own body. I mean, they're not real people, just baby factories.
Wow. That's just... so... far off from my perspective. Are you trolling me?
Quote:
If I recall correctly, you're a white christian male, aren't you? (And that's only half snark in that question)
White, yes (can't pick your parents), male, yes (I was going to say can't pick your gender, but I suppose in this day and age, you can). Christian? Raised as one, yes, but my view of Christianity (and religion in general) is that it offers some useful tenets for living a quality life, but that it's predominantly all metaphorical, and should be taken with a pretty hefty grain of salt (sized more like a salt lick, than what comes out of a salt-shaker). I'd probably describe myself as apathetically-agnostic (as in, at the present time, I don't know for sure, and nor do I really care), bordering on "something exists" (based on past experiences of either myself, or direct friends and family members). The only times I've been to church in the last several years are when I've been visiting my parents. I suppose you could say I "lost the faith" roughly mid-high school (at minimum, 15 years ago).
My personal views of birth control are that it's between (in no particular order) a) a woman and her doctor, b) a guy and his doctor, and c) partners (and if they can't agree on either use of (or not), or method of such, then they ought not to be having sex in the first place). That's it.
Oh, and I'm 100% pro-choice.
How does that fit in with your assumptions of me?
Cheers,
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index