|
(no subject)
|
loren bailor
|
Mar 22, 2008 12:34 PST
|
Remember when you go out to shop for all those things we need, that all these stores Wal-Mart, Kmart, Dollar store's etc.. are like big Church's in a way, Because all of them are passing the plate for the likes of Proctor & Gamble and their ultimate goal of destroying Godly values in our country. There is however another way. We can starve this beast by shopping at a store that will give at least 5% of each and every purchase to AIG, or any church that would like to receive it. There is no cost to the church at all they will get a check in the mail just because someone bought some toothpaste or laundry detergent it that simple. The best part is that these products are Better, Safer, and less expensive than store brands about and you will save money.
You can call toll free to find out about what you can do 1-888-879-2605
Thanks
Loren Bailor
AFA: Proctor & Gamble is top gay/lesbian sponsor on network Television
Published in February 22nd, 2008
Posted by Gary Shumway in Corporate, Homosexuality / GLBT, Utahns
Email this Post
Back on January 30th I posted regarding the effect of American Family Association’s (AFA) boycott on Ford’s bottom line. The boycott was enacted due to Ford’s overt support of the homosexual life style. Now AFA has come out with the top 10 pro-homosexual sponsors on television.
Those top 10 companies (in order) are: Procter & Gamble, Verizon, Target, Ford, Sears, Honda, Chrysler, General Motors, Victoria’s Secret, and Macy’s. This list is based on the sponsorship of programs which are seen to promote homosexuality or present it as a normal and accepted lifestyle. The programs from which AFA compiled the sponsorship list are: Cold Case (CBS), Boston Legal (ABC), My Name is Earl (NBC), Law & Order (NBC), Ugly Betty (ABC), Desperate Housewives (ABC), Brothers and Sisters (ABC), and Dirty Sexy Money (ABC). (Begin Aside: Is it just coincidence that ABC is the predominant broadcasting company or were they specifically selected by AFA or do they distribute a good portion of the homosexual programming? End Aside)
Of course it is my opinion that AFA is free to compile such a list and encourage boycotting the companies and I would assume, the programs. I can honestly, though somewhat sheepishly say, that I have never watched any of the above programs but I certainly do buy products and consume services of a few of the top 10 companies, i.e., Procter & Gambel, Verizon, Target, and Ford (maintenance of my F-250). I haven’t watched the programs because I do not watch much TV not because they are gay friendly programs. I hear Law & Order is a good snow. Desperate Housewives sounds … well … kinda desperate for content. The others I have heard little about.
As I do not watch the programs, do the sponsors run the usual and customary ads on the programs or are the ads targeted at homosexuals? It seems to me that just as AFA is free to compile their list, so are corporations free to target specific market segments (this is marketing 101). It is the nature and job of companies to produce quality products/services, sell their products/services efficiently, and maximize profits and stockholder returns (oh yeah, and make the CEO filthy rich). This is what companies do. Thus it is up to the public to let program sponsors know that they are losing more than they are gaining by selling specifically to homosexuals. If the public does not care, then companies, as long as it’s profitable (or there is some overriding corporate mandate (see Ford)), should obviously target the gay market.
That said, I do think Ford goes overboard. Personally, I have my issues with both AFA and Ford for various reasons. But even though we previously owned three Ford vehicles and I had purchased a 2005 F-250 before I knew of the boycott, I have decided not to buy another Ford until Ford becomes more neutral in this societal battle. My primary reasons for supporting the Ford boycott is that in addition to my being pro-family (whatever that means), I oppose Ford’s general support of socialist ideologies, and I oppose Ford’s support of the faction of gays which wish to push their lifestyle and make it mainstream. I contend that an individual has the right to believe what they want and do what they want with other consenting adults in private but that does not mean I have to agree with it nor encourage it. I am sure there would be gnashing of teeth if the issues were reversed.
I strongly resent that some homosexuals are pushing their message into grade schools and were successful in getting gender neutral and anti-Mom/Dad books approved in California schools. Some gays also are fighting the Boy Scouts tooth and nail. Being an Eagle scout myself I know the value of Scouts and thus have defended their position in previous Red Pills posts. Additionally, I support marriage as being between a man and a woman, thus oppose same sex marriage. Of course I have no problem if two or more of the same sex want to live together and have legal agreements between one another. But marriage and the family, being the keystone of society and one of the ‘institutions’ which despots endeavor to marginalize, must be strongly and unequivocally supported. I do not have a dog in the hunt regarding the biblical admonitions that homosexuality is a sin. In my opinion, that is between you and your God.
Here then is the AFA alert issued 2/21 entitled, “Proctor & Gamble Top-Homosexual Sponsor on Television“:
Procter & Gamble is the top pro-homosexual sponsor on network television. That is the result of a 12-week monitoring project by American Family Association. Other companies listed in the top ten pro-homosexual sponsors include Verizon, Target, Ford Motor Company, Sears, and Macy’s. To see the complete list of the Top Ten Pro-Homosexual Sponsors, click here.
The study showed Procter & Gamble more than doubled its advertising support to pro-homosexual programs over any other company in America!
To see all ads run by each advertiser and the programs they helped sponsor, click here.
The programs selected for monitoring were those that Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), a homosexual organization, identified as being supportive of the homosexual lifestyle.
No one except the networks and sponsors had any foreknowledge of which companies would help sponsor a program. Neither the networks nor the sponsors provide that information to the public in advance.
Send an email to Procter & Gamble Chairman Alan Lafley, asking him to stop the company’s sponsorship of overtly pro-homosexual television programs.
To redpills.org home page.
The image used in this post was obtained from HERE and is basically unaltered. This article, excluding the material cited or the material which is included herein but written by other authors or material covered by other copyrights, is copyright © 2008, by Gary Shumway. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce and distribute it electronically and in print, other than as part of a book and provided that mention of the author’s web site www.redpills.org is included. (Email notification is requested.) All other rights reserved. Gary Shumway is the author of Winging Through America and SCUBA Scoop.
Reddit src="http://www.redpills.org/wp-content/plugins/obsocialbookmarker/images/reddit.gif" width=16> Digg src="http://www.redpills.org/wp-content/plugins/obsocialbookmarker/images/digg.png" width=16> Facebook src="http://www.redpills.org/wp-content/plugins/obsocialbookmarker/images/facebook.gif" width=16> Technorati src="http://www.redpills.org/wp-content/plugins/obsocialbookmarker/images/technorati.png" width=16> Google src="http://www.redpills.org/wp-content/plugins/obsocialbookmarker/images/goog.png" width=16>
2 users responded in " AFA: Proctor & Gamble is top gay/lesbian sponsor on network Television "
Subscribes to this post comment rss or trackback url
Carl MacLeod said, in March 5th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Vet Disability Pension Suit ————— (P&G Denies Pension)
VET DISABILITY PENSION SUIT: The U.S. District Court in New Haven ruled 6 NOV that Procter & Gamble, which had turned down a veteran’s request for a disability pension because of his military injuries, did not give his case the full review it deserved and ordered the multinational corporation to reconsider the request. Carl MacLeod, 45, of West Haven, was diagnosed with chronic solvent encephalopathy in 2004, a condition that can be traced back to his two-decade tenure in the service, where he had a long history of exposure to hazardous materials and cleaning solvents. MacLeod worked at the Clairol plant in Stamford as a maintenance supervisor for three years starting in 2001, a company that later was bought by P&G. Physical injuries incurred during his military career left him with back and shoulder problems, exacerbated by arthritis, but he continued to work until the neurological deficits brought on by the chronic solvent encephalopathy became
apparent in OCT 04, according to medical records. CSE is a neurological disease that affects memory and cognitive functioning and, in MacLeod’s case, has also affected his balance and ability to walk, according to his records. The decline is gradual and is expected to end in dementia and death.
U.S. District Judge Mark Kravitz found that P&G, which earned $2.7 billion in profits in the quarter ending Sept. 30, improperly amended its disability plan to exclude personnel with military injuries and also did not give Macleod, as required, a review of the facts in his case. Kravitz said the court would defer to the P&G trustees’ “reasonable exercise” of their discretion in awarding or not awarding benefits to MacLeod, after it properly reviews his claims. But he noted in his ruling that MacLeod’s “personal situation is compelling.” Kravitz awarded attorney’s fees to MacLeod because he said it may deter the company from litigating a position “that is clearly at odds” with the language of its pension plan. Also, he said MacLeod’s suit ultimately will benefit a large class of individuals, namely those denied benefits because of military injuries. There is no timetable under which P&G has to act. A spokeswoman for P&G did not return
a request for comment, and has said in the past it’s against company policy to discuss issues in litigation. [Source: New Haven Register Mary O’Leary article 13 Nov 06 ++]
Loren Bailor
Home 219-956-4037Cell 219-613-0442Fax 219-956-3609
Toll Free 888-879-2605
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
|
|
 |
|
