JCPenney Responds to Homophobic Boycott

http://gawker.com/5914527/jcpenney-responds-to-homophobic-boycott-calls-with-gay-fathers-day-ad

One Million Moms sure seems to be bolstering the support for gays these days.

First it was the Archie comic they helped fly off the shelves in record time, now its Father's Day adds for gay men.

You know, I'm really proud of their work.

 

Great news!! Time to nudge BIGOTS to the margins of American society.

 

I like JCP's new pricing policy. I don't need to wait for coupons.

If JCP wants to pander to a particular albeit small (3%) market then good for them. If I had a store in P-Town or SF you can bet your bippy I'd have gay magazines, posters, sex toys etc etc etc. If there is money to be made a good capitalist will exploit it.

So, good for JCP for targeting a niche.

 

they already are. have you even noticed the color of the skin of the current resident of the WH? Sure, he's incompetent but bigots would not have put him there.

wrt to bigots and gay people, you don't hear about a lot of glitter bombing so it seesm the bigoted bombers are not as widespread as you suggest. You are of course making reference to the bigoted gay activists who are anti-hetero aren't you?

 

Of course, such a move on JCP puts them in line with the small (3%) market, but Ellen is also a popular TV icon and talk show host regardless of any sexual orientation. So I wouldn't call it "pandering" to any small niche, except when political attacks prompted them to stand up for that niche. Would have been a non-issue were it not for the attacks in the first place.

In any event, I'll have to be sure and support my local JCP

 

seriously, check out the price of their sheets and comforters. It's good quality and only a few bucks more than the ratty stuff at Wal mart

I like JCP and support any capitalist who sees an opportunity and targets it.

 

Pretty in America's face on this. Makes me wonder if the CEO is and/or or a signifcant number of Board members aren't homos. I mean this is a really stupid hill to die on.

 

JC Penny has raised their flag. They've made it known where they stand. I will no longer support them. Nor will anyone in my family.

 

You oppose adoption of disadvantaged children?

Ya, showing two happy adopted kids enjoying a much better life than they probably would have had otherwise is something worth fighting against.

 

I oppose children growing up in any environment other than a nuclear family. This includes single parent households. Why do you feel the need to push your beliefs on me?

 

"Existing" is not pushing my beliefs on you. You attempting to marginalize and silence my beliefs and very existence is the only example of someone trying to push their beliefs on others.

 

I think your emotions are getting the best of you here. You need to go back and re-read our last few posts.

 

Yes, it started with you complaining about a poster of 2 dads and their adopted kids. You apparently much prefer that this be marginalized and pretend like it doesn't exist.

 

So we can assume that you're against a widow or widower being able to keep their children upon losing a spouse, since you're against single parent households.

Why do you feel the need to push your beliefs on those who don't share them? After all, you're the one who came to this thread to express your discontent with JCP and to spout about opposing families who don't meet your personal standard.

 

Right on!! You hit the nail on the head. It's time to fight back against the bigotry.

 

Awesome, there are so many kids out there waiting for a home and that number will only grow because you want kids to go to married couples.

 

I agree in part that the best scenario is for a kid to be raised by the mom and dad. But, there are widows/widowers, divorcees etc. WRT to adoption, I too think married male/female couples should be first then male/female couples because a child should be exposed to both at home. But, after that, I also support single people adopting a child. if they can provide a caring loving home then that is still a heck of a lot better than no "home" environment for the child.

 

I think the more important question here isn't necessarily what you think is best, but what you think is worthy of demonizing, pretending like it doesn't exist and boycotting any company that makes references to it. People adopt. Gay couples adopt. It happens. Existing, and in this case, being marketed to is not "pushing our beliefs on others". It's being ourselves, and IMO one should never be demonized for adopting or marginalized. I've been through the adoption process... my parents were trying to adopt a child for 2 years. You see some of the most horrible, despicable and heartbreaking cases as you go through the foster care system. Children who lost their parents, children who's parents raped them or gave birth to them addicted to drugs, children who are just so sick and unhealthy that nobody wants them. It takes a big heart to adopt a child, and I find it rather despicable to be marginalizing a gay couple willing to go through this process.

 

no surprise there. Pennys has been gay for years.

 

That's why it is so AWESOME!

 

truer words have never been spoken. Most want babies. I've worked with older kids (8-12 yo)who have been at several foster homes and the small sample with whom I worked, despite being in a family(s) never felt "home"

Adopting a child is a strong statement.

 

fabulous maybe, but not awesome.

 

yeah it is. But it's one of confusion. Why would they want to adopt little heterosexual kids. unless for propagandizing? or abuse? or as a sort of sick revenge?

 

Ha! We all have our opinions.

 

Please, EXPLAIN the "confusion"... to the best of your ability.

Why not? Homosexual people have always raised kids, whether we knew about it, liked it or not.

I'm sure that isn't the purpose of most parents. And, as far as indoctrination goes... ALL parents do some of that.

Again, that isn't the intent or purpose of most parents. There is always the possibility of child abuse (sad to say).

Well, I think you'd make better sense just saying that you don't approve; much that you're expressing above is rather ludicrous... not supported by study/facts.