Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it's kellogg's money. if they don't care to give their money to phelps because he failed to wear a pink tu-tu at the olympics while yodeling the national anthem, that's entirely within their rights.
THIS JUST IN: Somking weed is still illegal regardless of what your personal feelings are about it.
That doesn't make it wrong though. A long time ago, it was illegal to instruct a slave how to read. Would it be wrong? I'm pretty sure it was illegal to shelter a Jew from being shipped off to camps, but was it wrong?
An even worse example to set to the children is that they should mindlessly accept the law as absolute morality.
Trust me - I can recognize such behavior, since as a tween/teenager I was unsupervised and pushing the envelope shall we say. My girls are world's apart from my life at that age - intentional on my part.
you must have a very low opinion of yourself if your throwing hammer and tongs at making sure your kids don't turn out like you. just an observation
Lets not go as far as comparing the legalization of weed to having equal rights for every race in the country.
Why not? Weed is actually safer than alcohol, rather than being "created equal" as races are. Potsmokers are generally more peaceful than alcoholics, and yet the potsmokers are the ones who are punished simply for the act; alcoholics don't get punished until it leads them to commit a crime (DUI, assault). It's just as much a civil injustice as segregation, because it involves punishments based on a hypocritical and arbitrary law. It's cultural discrimination.
I'm very confused by this thread (not unusual through no fault of my own).
There seem to be two competing and contradictory arguments.
Kellogg's, has a right to hire or fire anyone they choose as a representative of their product. This is true, aside from contractual issues, beyond a doubt.
Kellogg's customers have a right to buy or not buy Kellogg's products for any reason whatsoever, and they have the right to organize others to do the same if for any reason Kellogg's offends their political or social viewpoint.
Both have these rights.
What I don't understand is how Kellogg's' right supersede the rights of the customers since the customers have a right which doesn't violate Kellogg's rights, particularly when Kellogg's underlying action is to attract customers to their products in the first place.
it's kellogg's money. if they don't care to give their money to phelps because he failed to wear a pink tu-tu at the olympics while yodeling the national anthem, that's entirely within their rights.
that said, current marijuana laws are stupid.
i agree wholeheartedly with you. the reality is that the war on drugs is unjust. kelloggs, in taking an unnecessary stand for cheap pr, is fostering the attitude of intolerance which is why we as a country are not coming around to the fact that the war on drugs is unjust
Lets not go as far as comparing the legalization of weed to having equal rights for every race in the country.
lets not do anything which doesn't suit your narrowminded agenda
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
