Lowe's Pulls Ads From American Muslim Time Slot

[Fairy1]

They were informed that Mohamed had a 9 year old wife whom he considered his favorite. They needed to draw the line and they did. It's THEIR money. A little research might help you guys see things in the light of day.

I didn't see that in any of the media reports on this particular story. Do you have a link you can share?

I do agree about doing research. On anything and everything.

 

[Spoiler]

I wonder what Lowe's would do if the same bigoted "conservative" groups pressured them to cease advertising on other programs that are watched by or supportive of any other religious groups that differ from their own.

I also wonder what other retailers advertise on this show and if they, too, have been pressured to stop advertising.

And, finally, I wonder how we have gotten so backwards, again.

And just so Lowe's and their buddies know, I bought my CHRISTMAS tree at Home Depot.

They did the right thing as soon as they discovered that they had touched the tar baby. Why are you name calling? Would you like it if someone forced you to pay them to support something and you found out the REAL TRUTH. Of course not. It's their money and they can spend it as they wish.
All major religions are founded on something akin to The Golden Rule. Their founders were the "peacenicks" of the past like Budda and Jesus but Mohamad killed thousands with his army. He cut off the heads of 800 Jews in just one instance. Just google for links ... there are thousands.

 

[Gardenlady]

They were informed that Mohamed had a 9 year old wife whom he considered his favorite. They needed to draw the line and they did. It's THEIR money. A little research might help you guys see things in the light of day.

Mary was likely not much older than that when she was unmarried and pregnant. So maybe Lowes should pull any advertisements related to Christian holidays, or shown during Christian themed programming as well.

 

[jjw]

Sorry Nova I disagree. If they believed that the show was misrepresenting or propagandizing or sanitizing a religious belief that they do not support, it is their right to pull their advertising. There are significant religious differences. We aren't going to change a Muslim into a Christian any more than we will vice versa... Our country's government should treat them both equal but we do not require different religions to "accept" others as equal to their own.

I dare you to call Muslims religious bigots...the ones who would like to see to it that gays are executed, the ones who carve Stars of David into human flesh - you would call them radicals but aren't they also bigoted by your definition?

BBM
We are discussing the Muslims that are shown on All-American Muslim. They do not represent the type of extreme Muslims you are talking about. Actually, I've never met a Muslim that acted the way you described. The examples you gave is a extremist version that could belong to any religious group. In my opinion, extremists use religon as an excuse to spread their hatred. Religon itself usually has very little to do with their hatred.

 

[kline]

Wow there is a mindset to be proud of:Upset that a show featuring Americans of a certain cultural back ground that portrays them in a way that doesnt conform to their narrow bigoted preconcieved ideas of who those Americans are.
This whole issue says alot more about the folks who are protesting then it does about the series or American Muslims.
If they dont have the personal insight to be embarassed over such idiocy there is probably nothing anyone could say to them.
If Lowes wishes to set a precedent of catering to those sort of people ...well good luck with that.

 

[TrackerSam]

Respectfully snipped-I just want to make sure I am clear here-are you saying that conservatives do not have any bigoted groups that they have formed? Only liberals do? :floorlaugh:

Not at all. I'm not saying nor did I say that only liberals are bigots. I'm saying that they are allowed to get away with it without the media attacks. Were liberals bigots when they said during Obama's campaign that he was not "black enough"? Someone said of Gingrich " The further a monkey climbs up a pole the better you can see it's butt". No one batted an eye. Had that been said about Obama, someone would have been hit by a bat and charges of racism would rule the day. I don't recall any right wing group calling for boycotts. I'm not saying it hasn't happened - just saying I don't recall any. And a boycott is a method of forcing someone to do something they don't want to do.
Are you claiming there is no bias in the media?

 

[rossva]

as angelmom posted up thread:

"I would just like to point out that Home Depot refused to advertise on the show too."

The Association’s website cites an e-mail from Home Depot saying that it too will not run future advertisements on “All-American Muslim”.

http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/i...-show&catid=155:nonprofit-newswire&Itemid=986

And just so Lowe's and their buddies know, I bought my CHRISTMAS tree at Home Depot.

 

[TrackerSam]

If people are offended by the words "Merry Christmas" they have very thin skin.

I don't worry myself with offending others by using the words. I would not be offended if someone told me happy Hanukkah. I don't celebrate it, but it wouldn't "offend" me and I certainly would not think it was being used as a weapon.

I believe in Christ. I say the word
Christmas.

I chose to spend my hard earned money on cards that use the word Christmas.

Why is that offensive?

IMO those who take that as offensive have bigger issues than the words I use.

JMO

Being offended is a choice. And you're correct - they choose to be offended due to their issues.

 

[Trident]

If Loews wishes to spend their advertising dollars the way they see fit - more power to them. I wish others would have the fortitude to follow their own dictates instead of cowering before the hackneyed term "bigot".

My opinion only

 

[not_my_kids]

I say Merry Christmas! I say it because I'm Christian, and because the holiday is called Christmas, within my religion. I think I would get some mighty funny looks for wishing people Happy Kwanzaa or Merry December! But when someone says Happy Holidays, I certainly don't take offense, they might not be Christian, or they might not celebrate Christmas for some personal reason. Their decision, not mine, and they are not hurting me a bit by celebrating or not celebrating. I say Merry Christmas to people I know, I say it on Facebook, because that is my personal page to say as I wish. In public, when a stranger holds a door for me or stops an elevator so I can get on, this time of year, I say "Thank you, and happy holidays". Frankly, it takes too long to say, "Merry Christmas or whatever similar religious holiday you celebrate in the winter, and have a good New Year's too, unless you are using a different calendar or do not mark the passing of time." There is a thing as too politically correct, and I for one, won't play the game any further than I feel is necessary.

What the heck does any of this have to do Lowe's and advertising revenue?

 

[believe09]

Guys, please move away from the Merry Christmas debate and keep on topic.

TIA!

 

[Nova]

Sorry Nova I disagree. If they believed that the show was misrepresenting or propagandizing or sanitizing a religious belief that they do not support, it is their right to pull their advertising. There are significant religious differences. We aren't going to change a Muslim into a Christian any more than we will vice versa... Our country's government should treat them both equal but we do not require different religions to "accept" others as equal to their own.

I dare you to call Muslims religious bigots...the ones who would like to see to it that gays are executed, the ones who carve Stars of David into human flesh - you would call them radicals but aren't they also bigoted by your definition?

You disagree based on what, divine revelation? We have the one source with a quote from a Lowe's representative. On what basis do we assume Lowe's actually has some other motivation?

As for Muslims who oppose gay rights, carve Stars of David into perceived "traitors", commit so-called "honor" killings or blow themselves up in crowded malls, I have no problem calling them religious bigots. Who does?

Where I don't agree is with your post above that seems to imply that moderate Muslims have the burden of proof in showing they are not religious extremists. Since when do we shift that burden to individuals who, as far as we know, have done nothing wrong?

That's like demanding that Kimberly prove she doesn't shoot abortion providers: (a) not her job; and (b) how could she possibly prove such a thing? (For the record, I don't for a moment think Kimberly is a violent person; I'm specifically using her as an example because she is such an unlikely suspect.)

 

[Nova]

PS I just checked and the show is on Hulu. Think I will watch.

The hairs stand up on the back of my neck when we threaten others' freedom to believe by calling them bigots or throwing the term racist around. If I don't agree with another's religion and want to boycott something having to do with it (I don't and never have BTW) it's nun yo bizness, it's my right. There is no requirement that we "like" (to use an overused Facebook term) everything or everyone or their beliefs. We are free to dislike and to not support, we are not free to harm or cause a deprivation of other's fundamental rights. Big difference. Great, now I have to shop at Lowes. Last time I was there the service sucked!

Ziggy, the original link has Lowe's saying it is canceling its ads in response to complaints that the show doesn't portray American Muslims in a sufficiently negative light.

That's the same as a company canceling ads to be shown during The Sound of Music because somebody complained the nuns aren't portrayed as child molesters. Sure, a company has the right to do so, but a lot of us might take offense.

 

[Nova]

They were informed that Mohamed had a 9 year old wife whom he considered his favorite. They needed to draw the line and they did. It's THEIR money. A little research might help you guys see things in the light of day.

Yeah? And just how old was Mary when God decided to impregnate her?

 

[Nova]

If Loews wishes to spend their advertising dollars the way they see fit - more power to them. I wish others would have the fortitude to follow their own dictates instead of cowering before the hackneyed term "bigot".

My opinion only

Except per the original link, it isn't "their own dictates" that are at issue, it is the dictates of small but vocal groups of Christian bigots.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Yeah? And just how old was Mary when God decided to impregnate her?

No one knows for certain. But since she was already betrothed to Joseph, she had to be at least menstruating (which happened later back then) in order to be considered an adult.

From what I have read, it is likely that Mary was around 13-15 during the time of her marriage, with her giving birth to Jesus at around 14 to 16 years old.

But, like I said, nobody knows for sure.

 

[Fairy1]

Except per the original link, it isn't "their own dictates" that are at issue, it is the dictates of small but vocal groups of Christian bigots.

Exactly.

I would also venture to say that the vast majority of companies that advertise on television don't do so in support of specific programs, but rather in order to drive revenues by marketing to their targeted demographics. A company the size of Lowe's invests a tremendous amount of money to determine where they'll get the most bang for their advertising dollars. There would have been a lot less fallout if they had pulled their advertising quietly and, if called on it, just explained they realized it wasn't the right advertising vehicle for their brand.

But that's not what they said and so, IMO, their position is crystal clear. And while it wouldn't otherwise have been anyone's business, they made it everyone's business by disclosing their reasons for pulling their commercials.

 

[Nova]

No one knows for certain. But since she was already betrothed to Joseph, she had to be at least menstruating (which happened later back then) in order to be considered an adult.

From what I have read, it is likely that Mary was around 13-15 during the time of her marriage, with her giving birth to Jesus at around 14 to 16 years old.

But, like I said, nobody knows for sure.

That's roughly what I thought, Kimberly. Thanks. My point was just that in centuries past people got married earlier. Yes, nine is pushing it, but who knows if that is literal? What we do know is that concepts of childhood were very different in the past (and no wonder, given that most people were dead before they were 30!).

Blaming modern Muslims because their prophet was a "child molester" is a dangerous game. I doubt Jews and Christians want the prophets of the Old Testament (or even Jehovah Himself) held to modern legal standards.

 

[Fairy1]

That's roughly what I thought, Kimberly. Thanks. My point was just that in centuries past people got married earlier. Yes, nine is pushing it, but who knows if that is literal? What we do know is that concepts of childhood were very different in the past (and no wonder, given that most people were dead before they were 30!).

Blaming modern Muslims because their prophet was a "child molester" is a dangerous game. I doubt Jews and Christians want the prophets of the Old Testament (or even Jehovah Himself) held to modern legal standards.

So true. If we're going to be held accountable and punished for the sins of our fathers, we should all get in line!

 

[gitana1]

Gosh, guys. What are we talking about on this thread? Islam, like Christianity, is one of the major three monotheistic religions. It is not some dangerous cult, unless, like any religion, it is treated as such. I'm sorry, but it is plain wrong and seriously offensive to criticize the religion and its adherents as a whole.

Islam is the "tar baby"? (Come on). It's evil because Mohammed was a warrior? So were many of our (Christian) prophets. Mohammed is not their god. He's a prophet. And our bible is FILLED with acts of what can be deemed genocide and warfare. God commanded his people to "utterly destroy" every Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, and three other tribes that most would not recognize, leaving alive "nothing that breathes". Duet. 20:16-17. Joshua slaughtered everyone in Hebron and Debir, "utterly destroy[ing] all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded." Joshua 10:36-41. How about Psalm 137 that states "happy shall he be" who dashes Babylonian babies against stones in retribution for the captivity in Babylon?

I could go on and on.

What is important in any religion is what people do with it. Extremists throughout history have twisted religion to suit their sick desires. Today, we suffer as a result of extremist terrorists. And in this country, we have been led to believe that ALL Muslims feel the same way that a bunch of sick, fanatical monsters do. But that is not true. It is offensive to say so. Which is what this thread, really, is about. And, it is small minded to demand that all members of one religion prove they are not as evil as members of the religion who twist it for evil purposes. Frankly, it is ridiculous to me.

Not at all. I'm not saying nor did I say that only liberals are bigots. I'm saying that they are allowed to get away with it without the media attacks. Were liberals bigots when they said during Obama's campaign that he was not "black enough"? Someone said of Gingrich " The further a monkey climbs up a pole the better you can see it's butt". No one batted an eye. Had that been said about Obama, someone would have been hit by a bat and charges of racism would rule the day. I don't recall any right wing group calling for boycotts. I'm not saying it hasn't happened - just saying I don't recall any. And a boycott is a method of forcing someone to do something they don't want to do.
Are you claiming there is no bias in the media?

Liberals didn't say Obama wasn't black enough. There were discussions on the right and the left as to whether his ethnic background - white mother, African immigrant father, raised by a white grandma and mom in Hawaii - would resonate with black Americans whose cultural experience is far different. Media articles phrased the topic in the form of the question, "Is Obama black enough?" to spark interest in the discussion. That is not bigotry.

Using a monkey reference to refer to Gingrich is offensive. But that is not bigotry either. Reference to apes or monkeys is a historically bigoted way to refer to black people, not to white politicians. Thus, it would be bigoted (and not merely offensive) if Gingrich was black.

as angelmom posted up thread:

"I would just like to point out that Home Depot refused to advertise on the show too."

The Association’s website cites an e-mail from Home Depot saying that it too will not run future advertisements on “All-American Muslim”.

http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/i...-show&catid=155:nonprofit-newswire&Itemid=986

Huge difference. Nowhere is there an e-mail from Hope Depot admitting it pulled ads due to pressure from anti-Muslim groups. Lowe's did. Instead, Home Depot stated that one ad ran on the show, but that they were never sponsors and didn't plan to be. Had Lowe's said that, again, we would not be having a discussion about this at all.