Tag Archives: morality

Cowardice

Posted on by
Reply

And yet another reason to not buy any Anheuser-Busch beer.

Anheuser-Busch…sent a letter to jittery distributors telling them it had cut ties with the firm responsible for the concept that has led to Bud Light sales cratering since Mulvaney last month posted a video on TikTok touting the best-selling beer in the country, multiple sources said.
The Belgian-based conglomerate said the beer can at the center of the firestorm, which features Mulvaney’s face, was not produced by Anheuser-Busch or in any of its facilities, several distributors told The [New York] Post.

To an extent, the Bud Light producer’s managers are right. John Skeffington, family-owned Skeff Distributing CEO:

The single can was produced by a third-party ad agency, not Anheuser-Busch.

However. Anheuser-Busch’s managers have final approval of its ad agencies’ advertisement campaigns, whether or not the campaigns then are produced in house or by third-parties. A-B’s managers already have placed “on leave” Bud Light’s Marketing VP, Alissa Heinerscheid, and A-B’s Group Vice President for Marketing, Daniel Blake, over their failure to exercise their control over advertising done in Bud Light’s name.

Even if the unidentified-by-A-B “third-party ad agency” had produced and released the advertising move without that prior approval, A-B’s managers had after the fact approval/disapproval, and those worthies chose not to speak up at all. If they actually disapproved of the ad, they would have blocked it in the first place, or immediately after the fact spoken against it.

Only in the aftermath of the hooraw that’s threatening company sales, are those managers, from A-B CEO Michel Doukeris on down, speaking at all, and they’re still refusing to acknowledge straightforwardly their mistake, and they’re still refusing to say what they’re going to do to not repeat their mistake in future. They’ve only issued weasel-worded remarks that don’t even pretend to address the matter in any serious way.

Their latest move, now, is to insist “twarn’t us” and blame an anonymous “third-party” agency and throw it under the bus.

They still won’t accept their own responsibility for the fiasco.

Their company’s products still are not worth our purchase money.

In Which Riley Gaines is Right

Posted on by
Reply

Riley Gaines thinks the only way left for women to protect their sports and their sports programs, to go back to being able to compete on even ground, is to boycott competitions in which a trans athlete(s) is competing, and to be joined by their coaches in the boycott.

We have to have girls who, when the whistle blows, they don’t run, they don’t swim. They stand up on the block and they don’t go[.]
…
I think this will get worse before it gets better. How many girls have to be injured playing against a male, how many girls have to lose out on scholarships and trophies and titles? How many girls have to feel violated in the locker room?

Progressive-Democrat House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D, NY) gives the lie to Party’s and its Leftist supporters’ “argument” against barring trans athletes from women’s sports with his smear against MAGA (Make America Great Again) and Republicans, using those terms as some sort of condemnation:

MAGA Republicans are trying to sensationalize an issue that doesn’t really exist in the way that they are falsely portraying[.]

He deepens his lie by claiming that the problem with biological men competing in women’s sports isn’t a problem.

Trans athletes and their Progressive-Democratic Party supporters could make a better case, or at least an honest one, by arguing, under Title IX, for requiring sports programs already receiving Federal money (which is to say, receiving the tax dollars remitted to the Federal government by us citizens, and then transferred to those programs) and which already have separate men’s and women’s sports programs to have, also, substantially equally funded and supported trans athlete sports programs.

The better solution, and one which likely would have broad bipartisan support (depending on the actual details), would be to amend Title IX, which already mandates program separation based on biological sex, to explicitly include a third separation, trans.

Another Example of Federal Government Run Amok

Posted on by
Reply

This time it’s by President Joe Biden’s (D) infamous medical wonder, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, in his attack on those evil Catholics. This attack is on Oklahoma’s Saint Francis Health System. The hospital system maintains, in the chapel of its Saint Francis Hospital South, a candle representing the presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

That’s no good, insists Becerra, who had—or has tacitly allowed—his Department’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to use the Joint Commission (nominally an independent accrediting organization which CMS uses for Medicaid and Medicare certification) to manufacture a fire hazard (!) from the candle.

Lose the symbol of Christ or lose Federal certification and funding for Medicaid and Medicare is the threat from the Feds.

Fire hazard: this is the candle and its danger, located as it is in the hospital’s chapel:Here is Becerra’s statement, carefully done through a spokesperson, instead of being made by Doctor of Ersatz Becerra himself:

[T]he department “is aware of a safety finding involving a fire risk, made by an independent accrediting organization, issued to a hospital in Oklahoma.”

Apparently, all those flammables are too close to the glass and brass-enclosed flame. Apparently, too, the flame of Christ burns so brightly in Catholics that the candle’s flame might burn through all that glass and brass, leap that distance, and ignite the furniture. Or something.

This is yet another campaign in the Biden administration’s war on religion.

Update: The Biden administration has–for now–decided not to pursue the Saint Francis Health System over the candle in the System’s Saint Francis Hospital South.

After the hospital threatened legal action through The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the government reversed course on what seemed to be the latest development in a pattern of aggressive regulatory and criminal enforcement actions by the Biden administration against the Catholic Church.

Child Abuse

Posted on by
Reply

The Oregon House of Representatives, dominated as it is by the Progressive-Democratic Party, has moved to legalize child mutilation and sex abuse. Oregon House Bill 2002 B, passed strictly partisanly (the vote was 36-23),

would allow minors younger than 15 to obtain an abortion without parental consent. Doctors would not be compelled to disclose this information to parents unless receiving express written permission from the child.
The legislation would expand taxpayer money to fund gender reassignment surgery—including sterilization for children as young as 15—without their parent’s consent.

This governmental abuse of parents’ children is another path along the Progressive-Democratic Party’s plan to fundamentally transform America,

We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.
—Barack Obama, October 30, 2008
We are going to have to change our conversation; we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history; we’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation.
—Michelle Obama, May 14, 2008

and to fundamentally change things—our economy, certainly, as President Joe Biden (D) only recently asserted but also the relationship between children and their parents and between children and the State.

Aiding and Abetting Child Abuse

Posted on by
Reply

Washington and California both have bills wending their way through their respective legislatures that would shut a child’s parents out of the decision-making, even the knowledge that the decision-making is in progress, associated with the application of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and breast and genital removal, and other “treatments”—cynically called gender affirming care—to their children.

Washington is on the verge of denying parents notice that their runaway children are living in licensed shelters if the children are seeking “protected health care services,” defined as gender affirming care and “reproductive health care” such as abortion and contraception.

And

The California Assembly approved legislation this month…that would let children 12 and up in the Medi-Cal program “consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services,” if the “attending professional person” believes they are “mature enough to participate intelligently” in the services. Legal experts told the Associated Press that would cover gender identity counseling.

Were an individual adult to do this to a child, he’d be guilty of child sexual abuse and metaphorically drawn and quartered, and rightly so. But when an institution does it, it’s OK.

Go figure. And then go figure why any parents would want to risk their children by living in such a State.