boycott question

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread

I read on another thread how Target stores donate money to fund Planned Parenthood who in turn is suposedly funding abortion services. In the past, I recall talk of Colgate Palmolive, and all their evil deeds, and how we should boycott them as well. My neightbor says that McDonalds uses american beef for their hamburgers, but Burger King, on the other hand, uses beef from questionable sources, IE: Mad cow type sources in Europe. I'm curious: IS THEIR A MASTER LIST SOMEWHERE, THAT DESCRIBES ALL THESE COMPANIES THAT DON'T DESERVE MY MONEY, AND WHY? Curious minds need to know.

-- Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 12, 2001

Answers

Action Dude,

It depends on who's "master List" that you want. I am sure that there are any number of lists out there, for just as many purposes.

Your post starts off talking about Abortion Services, something that I call "Murder For Hire". There appear to be a great number of posters on this board who think that this "choice" is (depending on your definition of "is") perfectly logical, legal, and moral. Heck they even think that you and I, with our tax dollars, should pay for it. Go figger...

-- Ed Copp (OH) (edcopp@yahoo.com), March 12, 2001.


The best option is not to spend any money. We try really hard! Seriously, though, one of the reasons we "dropped out" of mainstream society is that we felt that we couldn't get away from supporting practices that we didn't believe in (renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, politically bought corporate monopoly etc). It's not who you shouldn't buy from it's who you SHOULD buy from that would probably make for a shorter list.

-- David C (fleece@eritter.net), March 12, 2001.

Why not get it straight from the horse's mouth? Their web site has a large section on the groups that they contribute to and does not mention Planned Parenthood, by why not just email Target and ask them. Far too many of these rumors turn out to be completely false like the Procter and Gamble satanism rumor.

-- Steve - TX (steve.beckman@compaq.com), March 12, 2001.

MONDAY JANUARY 10 2000 -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Sacrificing humans to save animals? PETA gives grants to develop use of embryos, alternative to rat tests

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

By Joseph Farah © 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

The latest issue of Animal Times, the quarterly publication of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, announces the group's grants to companies developing human embryo testing as one of the alternatives to the use of rats and other beasts in product safety tests.

"PETA has given $250,000 to assist in the validation of non-animal test methods to replace existing animal tests," an article in the Winter 1999 edition of the journal says. "PETA awarded a $200,000 grant to the Institute for In Vitro Science (IIVS) in Maryland to support a replacement for the use of rats in lethal dose poisoning tests for chemicals, household products and pharmaceuticals."

The group also announced a $50,000 grant to Dr. Bjorn Ekwall of the Cytotoxicology Laboratory in Upsala, Sweden.

"Dr. Ekwall's work under the Multicenter Evaluation of In Vitro Cytotoxicity (MEIC) proved that the use of human cells can more accurately predict the toxic nature of a substance than can rodent tests," the article reported.

PETA describes itself as "an international non-profit animal protection organization with more than 600,000 members dedicated to establishing the rights of all animals." Prominent members include former Beatle Paul McCartney. Other celebrity supporters include "Politically Incorrect" host Bill Maher, actress Alicia Silverstone, actress Pamela Sue Anderson, and actor Steven Seagal, who said, according to the organization's magazine: "We have to view all life as equal."

But it's not PETA, alone, promoting an agenda of finding any alternative to animal testing -- even if it means experiments using human embryos. In fact, since 1993, the federal government has joined the movement with the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods ICCVAM.

The offshoot of the National Institutes of Health unites representatives from 14 federal agencies and programs that generate or use information from toxicological test methods to support human health or environmental risk assessments.

The committee was formed as a result of the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993. It is responsible for the coordination of the development and review of various alternative toxicological methods.

A United Kingdom group linked to IIVS defines the "replacement alternatives" to animal testing quite clearly. The Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments says the acceptable substitutes can be divided into six categories: information; computer- based systems; physico-chemical techniques; the use of lower organisms and embryo stages; human studies; and cell, tissue and organ cultures.

With regard to "cell, tissue and organ culture," the group has this to say: "In many disciplines, these in vitro systems are not seen as replacement alternatives, but as the norm, especially for studies at the cellular and molecular level. In many cases they are only relative replacements, because they require freshly obtained animal cells and tissue. However, even when freshly isolated material is required, the animals are used more economically, because a single animal will provide tissue for a number of cultures. Human material can sometimes be used, but it can be difficult to obtain, store and distribute. Some human tissue becomes available when it is removed during surgery. Human placenta has been suggested as a source of tissue for various types of research. For example, it contains mast cells which share certain structures with nerve cells and so can sometimes be used for neurological studies."

"The Institute does not conduct human embryo testing nor do we plan to," said Rodger D. Curren, Ph.D., president or the Institute for In Vitro Sciences, Inc. "We do grow both human and animal cells in plastic flasks, i.e. 'in vitro,' but the human cells are generally derived from normally discarded surgical tissue. ... Our laboratory does not conduct any in vitro fertilization."

The fund's corporate benefactors include: Avon Products Inc., Fabergé, L'Oréal, Pfizer Ltd, Proctor and Gamble Ltd., Safeway Stores and SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare. Corporate sponsors and supporters include Gillette, Warner Lambert UK Ltd, Woolworths, Colgate-Palmolive Ltd., Johnson & Johnson Ltd. and Johnson Wax Ltd.

Interestingly, Proctor and Gamble has been a frequent target of PETA for its use of animal tests.

The literature of the groups and companies active in this area suggest it is time to create human tissue banks as suppliers for expanded experimentation and testing in the future.

A spokeswoman for PETA found no contradiction in its support of organizations involved in human and animal embryo tests.

"I didn't know any commercial firms were doing human embryo tests," said Mary Beth Swetland, director of research and investigation for the group. "But, no, I don't see any problem with it. I don't think it raises any moral or ethical challenges for us. The tests we're funding at IIVS are human-cell tests, not embryo research."

-- Rebekah (daniel1@itss.net), March 12, 2001.


Accurate definition of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals...

-- Ed Copp (OH) (edcopp@yahoo.come), March 12, 2001.


Rebekah, Those are some sick puppies. Ouch. Maybe it would be easier to list major chains that are keeping their nose clean. Sad sometimes, to think how "far" our civilization has come.

-- Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 12, 2001.

Thanks for the info. If Target supports Planned Parenthood, I'll go out of my way to shop there next time.

-- jz (oz49us@yahoo.com), March 12, 2001.

I don't know if there is a "master list" but I wish there were - of companies and other entities and what they support. This deal about PETA doesn't surprise me - this is the same group that actually compared the number of chickens that will be killed in the US this year to the Jewish Holocaust. These people really have some nerve. The greatest danger behind it all in my opinion is that the view that all life is equal. When you start equating animal life with human life, one of the things you are leaving behind is God. God created people to have dominion over animals and He created us in his own image. So, how can people think that it is better to test new lipstick on human cells (I don't care what their source is - and even if they are "discarded tissue from a surgery" - I'm not sure alot of people would like to think of their tonsils being used to grow something in a lab - or heaven knows what else they do with them) than to use a rat or something like that?? I am amazed by these people and think they are out of touch with reality. I also don't believe for an instant they would continue to equate human life with animal life if the human was them!!! Cynthia

-- Cynthia Speer (farmsteader@gvtel.com), March 12, 2001.

PETA = militant vegetarian organization.It's that simple.They have a political agenda and use anti cruelity arguments to peel money out of the wallets of the fence sitters.The american humane society funnels money to them as well.So guess what? No more donations of time, food or money to the shelters or ASPCA from me.I love animals of all kinds.I also am part of the food chain.I do kill to eat and to protect myself.Someday the bear may eat me instead of me eating him.It is the nature of things.Then you have PETA that some how feels humans are only part of nature if they are hugging a redwood.God save us from the conflicted vegeterrorists.I'd eat them instead if it wasn't for kuru and aids.

-- greg (gsmith@tricountyi.net), March 13, 2001.

I like that part about VEGETERRORISTS, ha ... and so the list grows.

-- Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 13, 2001.


Whoa Greg, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. There is absolutely no financial connection between your local Humane Society which runs animal shelters, etc., and the Humane Society of the US which is a rabid militant "animal rights" group. You can continue to support the good work your local animal shelter does without supporting the nuts at HSUS.

-- Steve - TX (steve.beckman@compaq.com), March 13, 2001.

As far as companies that give to PP, you won't be able to buy anything if you boycott all of them...but check out this website for a list of them (an for a downloadable list) www.ewtn.com/antonin/listab.htm.

-- Christina (introibo2000@yahoo.com), March 13, 2001.

Your time would be better spent on a boycott of Kelloggs and related companies who have placed products on the shelves that tested positive for containing Starlink corn.

People who have never been in a life or death situation during a pregnancy shouldn't have a thing to say about it. Further, if they can fund all the fertility crap and have women producing unhealthy babies at 3 - 7 times the number per pregnancy, help pay for all the care, hospitals, both pre and post partum, then a woman should be able to insure her own choice.

Until you have walked in those shoes - you have no right to b***h. You keep your morals - I will keep on breathing. Sorry.

-- Sue Diederich (willow666@rocketmail.com), March 13, 2001.


http://www.prolifewisconsin.org/

This site has links to other sites and I know I saw the list somewhere using this site, but don't have time to look now. Good luck & yes Target does support PP & we must not allow our $ to be spent on the killing of innocent children.

-- Bob Frohmader (buksnort@mwt.net), March 13, 2001.


Makes me a bit uncomfortable when people talk about animals as though they have no feelings and are just here for us to use and abuse. I might expect that from people who aren't around them in the cities but hey , this is a country forum. A common correlation found among many sociopaths is the propensity to abuse animals. Seems there is something missing where they feel no empathy for other living things. After spending most of my life taking care of some sort of critters, I think they have most of the same attributes most of us have with the exception of common sense in which they surpass us in most instances. Yes I would be happy to let 'them ' use any part of my body which I am not currently using for any kind of research. Especially if it meant one less instance of animal abuse. And lastly, I love animals,they taste real good.

-- jz (oz49us@yahoo.com), March 14, 2001.


Very interesting! (Shades of "Laugh-In" from a kazillion years ago!). Anyway, I know that I cannot experience torture severe enough to get me to buy anything proffered by Tyson (clinton's buddies), Levi's, or Sara Lee! Probably won't hurt them much, but makes me feel better! And now my wife (30 years later) understands why I removed the distributor cap from the car when she said she was going to see a Hanoi Jane movie, with or without me. Every little bit helps, or at least does not provide aid and comfort to the enemy! GL!

-- Brad (homefixer@SacoRiver.net), March 14, 2001.

Ha. What did you do, Brad, chain her to the bed? What a true man you are.

Pretty weird how many people want to quash sex education and contraception, yet freak out about the number of abortions. UUUH, could there be a connection there?

JOJ

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@ecoweb.net), March 14, 2001.


Ya , JOJ, seems kinda obvious doesn't it. Of course some people are so bent on finding a boogeyman that I'm sure it requires no effort on their part to put their brain in neutral.

-- jz (oz49us@yahoo.com), March 14, 2001.

Christina and Bob, Thank you much for the sites. Money is too important to waste on the wrong people, and organizations. It is not unlike throwing pearls before swine, if you know what I mean.

-- Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 15, 2001.

As for Burger King, they have been involved in the tainted hamburger recalls in the past. I am wary of most of the fast food places. Please don't tell me about Taco Bell! (I only eat their non-beef items) Oh, I know one of you is going to enlighten me now!

-- Jean (schiszik@tbcnet.com), March 15, 2001.

Check out the American Family Association. They are a media watchdog group that lets people know who is doing what for boycott purposes.

I have not shopped Target because I don't like their salacious,semi- pornographic advertising. At least WalMart puts the bras on mannikins in their circulars. (Most of the time I think)

But I'm with you on the PP thing. I don't want to support anyone who support them.

It's kind of stupid how the abortion rights people think we pro- lifers want to squash sex ed and contraceptions. Aux contraire. It is promiscuous, destructive, disease spreading, sinful behaviour we don't want. It is the lies being spread by those who wish to excuse their lifestyles and bad choices.

We want to promote healthy sex ed that teaches intimacy between a married man/woman couple only and the use of safe contraceptives for those couples if they so choose. And to promote abstinence before marriage and to promote adoption if necessary for mistakes people will make.

Again, find AFA on the internet. They have a free publication you can sign up for. I don't think K Mart has ever recovered from the boycott against them brought on by their round about involvment in pornography. And Disney is hurting now from it.

-- Heather in MD (heathergorden@hotmail.com), March 16, 2001.


I'm with jz and jumpoffjoe. Planned Parenthood is about the only access a lot of women have to gynecological services and the means to prevent unwanted pregnancies (sometimes the words give it away...PLANNED parenthood). People don't care if they exacerbate a whole host of other problems just to satisfy their political agenda. I think another respondent said it best... walk in those shoes, then try to impose your will on others.

-- Rod Perrino (redjouster@aol.com), March 16, 2001.

I have a book called "Shopping for a Better Environment" by Laurence Tasaday which lists major corps with good records.

You can pick this book up probably at Amazon.com bookstore.

-- Cindy (colawson@mindspring.com), March 17, 2001.


I'm amused, Rod, at the thought of IMPOSING MY WILL ON OTHERS... IMPOSING MY WILL ON OTHERS... Let's look at what we are REALLY talking about: MONEY. And not just ANY money. We are talking about MY money. Now, if ME, spending MY MONEY at, let's say, Wal-Marte, instead of Targett causes a chain of events that put Targett out of business, well that is just too, too bad. I believe that what you are trying to tell me is that women should have a choice, and planned parenthood should have a choice, and Targett should have a choice, but I should NOT have a choice. Who's money are we talking about, again? Mine. And while I'm out and about spending it, I think I'll IMPOSE MY WILL at Borders and ask for Cindy's book. (Thanks Cindy) By the way, MOST women have a choice, and do NOT let someone else make that choice FOR them. At least 96% of ALL pregnancies are NOT caused by rape. But please feel free to support those 4% that are, by shopping wherever you please. I'm busy building a wall, however. I am doing a great work, and can not come down.

-- The Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 17, 2001.

P.S. I was just reading that there are more women than men in the world, so now I KNOW women REALLY have a choice. What was that song by "Captain and Toenail"?? Oh yeah: "You'd better shop around".

-- The Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 17, 2001.

Well dude perhaps you should keep on reading a bit more. Majority or not, anyone that thinks women have a fair shake on this planet.....well you've got to be kidding. Making progress but a long way from fair. Your right in that you have the choice in where you spend your money and how you think, as we all do. I would suggest that the more walls we build,however doesn't contribute to us all getting along. There are two sides to every story. NOt saying we have to agree but listening does add to our knowledge and perhaps even make room for a bit of empathy. A few reading journeys to some of the newsworthy areas of the world such as israel, Ireland, etc. clearly demonstrate the effect of building walls and being right. Of course thats just my opinion. peace

-- jz (oz49us@yahoo.com), March 17, 2001.

I haven't heard of a book as you are requesting. I wish I could find one. There does seem to be a good one though on supporting American business. You can find it at this url: http://www.howtobuyamerican.com/index.shtml If you find one with more of the morality factor, I'd be interested also. It is heartbreaking to think of where our money is going.

-- Shilohs Child (shilohschild@christianemail.com), March 18, 2001.

Before getting on too high of a horse about shopping WalMart over Target, have you ever noticed that WalMart no longer uses the slogan about buying American? Have you ever noticed how many of their products are coming from China? And what is it again that you object to about China???? Wasn't it something about forced abortions? How soon they forget.

-- j. emdall (jemdall@excite.com), March 18, 2001.

If you wish to be enlightened about Wal-Mart, please get ahold of the little book entitled HOW WAL-MART IS DESTROYING AMERICA AND THE WORLD AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT by Bill Quinn......very interesting stuff.......I wouldnt shop in a Wal-Mart if it was the last store on earth...

-- Earthmama (earthmama48@yahoo.com), March 18, 2001.

Wal-mart......always the low wage..always...........they wont get my $

-- jz (oz49us@yahoo.com), March 18, 2001.

Earthmama, I was in Vermont last year on vacation and the locals were describing how there were only TWO Wal-Marts in their entire state because the people all protested and petitioned everybody and anybody to KEEP THEM OUT!!! The problem as I understood it was that the 'MOM & POP' stores were disappearing from the landscape. Vermonters had decided that they wanted things to stay the way they were. According to the account we heard, Wal mart would brazenly come into a store with a clipboard and start taking NOTES on various items, prices and etc.. When asked by the clerk if they could help them, the spy would say "No, I work for Wal Mart, and we're just comparing market trends, etc." They'd find out what sells, take notes on locals that were consigning/selling crafts, and even look them up to add to their lower-price available-merchandise, schemes. "yeah, we could sell that for less..." That kind of thing. Kinda reminds you of that song about 'the little man". I also, have noticed a lot of MADE IN CHINA labeling on Wal-Mart items. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Which reminds me of another question. Foreign cars. But maybe I'll start a new thread for that one...

-- The Action Dude (theactiondude@yahoo.com), March 18, 2001.

WalMart came in here, despite the petitions to keep them out. Put three Mom and Pop family businesses out for the count. What do they care what they do to the community? Then they set about buying the cheapest things possible and selling at whatever price they want, because they've got you over a barrel then. There are stores sitting empty now that have been in business for decades, and families who are scraping to make a living. I WISH that Target would buy one of those empty buildings and come in and kick WalMart's butt.

-- julie f. (rumplefrogskin@excite.com), March 19, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ