Mississippi passes religious 'Freedom' bill:

Originally posted by googlefudge
Actually I agree with Suzianne, boycotting the entire state as Springsteen has done
[similar to what Ray Charles did back in the day] is the more powerful and more effective
protest.

Boycotting the entire state gets Springsteen ~ and the issue ~ some publicity, sure. But I think you need to hit the actual culprit-businesses in the pocket, and, if you can, only them, or that should at least be your aim. Springsteen cancelling a show doesn't do this. Making the whole state hurt just dissipates the pressure among people who already disagree with the bill and they don't need to be pressured. The damage done by a blunderbuss boycott would still be felt years after the law was repealed. Businesses that actually apply the law need to be singled out.

Originally posted by FMF
Boycotting the entire state gets Springsteen ~ and the issue ~ some publicity, sure. But I think you need to hit the actual culprit-businesses in the pocket, and, if you can, only them, or that should at least be your aim. Springsteen cancelling a show doesn't do this. Making the whole state hurt just dissipates the pressure among people who already disagree wit ...[text shortened]... years after the law was repealed. Businesses that actually apply the law need to be singled out.

I'm all for those that live in the state from boycotting any business that takes advantage
of this law to discriminate.

I'm also for anyone and everyone outside the state to boycott the whole state and make it
clear why.

If other states watch on and see the economy of Mississippi take a huge hit, along with it's
reputation because people boycott the state due to it's extreme laws that creates a big incentive
not to follow in it's footsteps.
And it creates a strong imperative for everyone in the state to get off their ass's and campaign
against the law as they ALL feel it's effects.

This doesn't dilute the effect, it multiplies it as everyone is effected.

The evidence of the past shows this to be much more effective.


I might site as an example the boycotting of South Africa during apartheid, putting pressure on the
entire country and all that lived in it to change.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
ill answer the question you dodged for you....no, you wouldnt be able to hide a physiological response. its a proven scientific fact that the body responds to sexual stimulus before the conscious brain can act....you see a woman you find attractive in the street your body responds a split second before your conscious brain can choose to divert or dwell ...[text shortened]... but only after he has had a physiological response of arousal......thus making him a homosexual.

That may be, but it does not take the brain long to catch up and and by will, change the thoughts.

Originally posted by FMF
Springsteen cancels North Carolina concert over 'anti-gay' law

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36000905

I for one will boycott Springsteen. I wish entertainers would just perform for what they are paid for and keep their political ideas to themselves.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I for one will boycott Springsteen. I wish entertainers would just perform for what they are paid for and keep their political ideas to themselves.

" I wish entertainers would just perform for what they are paid for and keep their political ideas to themselves."

Could we extrapolate therefore that you also believe people who issue marriages licences should 'perform what they are paid to do and keep their religious ideas to themselves?'

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
" I wish entertainers would just perform for what they are paid for and keep their political ideas to themselves."

Could we extrapolate therefore that you also believe people who issue marriages licences should 'perform what they are paid to do and keep their religious ideas to themselves?'

Yes, agreed.. Obeying the law is a command

Originally posted by FMF
Boycotting the entire state gets Springsteen ~ and the issue ~ some publicity, sure. But I think you need to hit the actual culprit-businesses in the pocket, and, if you can, only them, or that should at least be your aim. Springsteen cancelling a show doesn't do this. Making the whole state hurt just dissipates the pressure among people who already disagree wit ...[text shortened]... years after the law was repealed. Businesses that actually apply the law need to be singled out.

Springsteen seems to agree with me in this article in which he says that he considered just "protesting from the stage" and why he decided to cancel the show instead.

https://www.yahoo.com/music/springsteen-cancels-show-because-north-carolina-law-195815672.html

Originally posted by Suzianne
Springsteen seems to agree with me in this article in which he says that he considered just "protesting from the stage" and why he decided to cancel the show instead.

https://www.yahoo.com/music/springsteen-cancels-show-because-north-carolina-law-195815672.html

Well I don't agree with Springstein on this, as I have demonstrated. The proceeds from his concert, for example, could have gone a long way to promote some kind of non-governmental 'licensing' campaign - maybe endorsed signs boasting of the business's rejection of the bill etc. - and public relations/public education initiatives on the issue, schemes to drum up investment specifically in bill-rejecting businesses. etc. etc.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I might site as an example the boycotting of South Africa during apartheid, putting pressure on the entire country and all that lived in it to change.

I don't think the boycotting of South Africa was particularly successful ~ it took too long and there were maybe two generations of innocent poor people who bore the brunt of it. I don't think the boycott of Cuba could be described as having been a success either. Or Iran. Or North Korea.

Originally posted by FMF
I don't think the boycotting of South Africa was particularly successful ~ it took too long and there were maybe two generations of innocent poor people who bore the brunt of it. I don't think the boycott of Cuba could be described as having been a success either. Or Iran. Or North Korea.

Well, at least the Cuban's learned very well how to keep old cars running....

Originally posted by checkbaiter
That may be, but it does not take the brain long to catch up and and by will, change the thoughts.

it the thought and feeling was a homosexual one then regardless if you 'by will' started thinking about crop rotation or tax returns....it would still make you a homosexual. just as if you stifle every sexual thought you have about mrs checkbaiter would still be a heterosexual.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
it the thought and feeling was a homosexual one then regardless if you 'by will' started thinking about crop rotation or tax returns....it would still make you a homosexual. just as if you stifle every sexual thought you have about mrs checkbaiter would still be a heterosexual.

Nonsense, if you have thoughts about being a fairy, does that make you a fairy?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Nonsense, if you have thoughts about being a fairy, does that make you a fairy?

Hang on, don't you dream fairy music?

Be honest now...

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Hang on, don't you dream fairy music?

Be honest now...

you are my shrink and our sessions are supposed to be confidential!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Nonsense, if you have thoughts about being a fairy, does that make you a fairy?

illogical, try again.