(February 27, 2014 at 9:40 pm)Beccs Wrote: If I was over there I'd be buying a few hundred dollars' worth.

Support these girls when you can, folks.

You... could send me a few hundred dollars and I'll buy some

As it stands, I can only afford a few boxes. But I'ma buy some.
I've never even had a girlscout cookie before.
And I'm still not going to Chick fil A.
Tara, how did that work out, anyways? I personally don't care if they pulled a 180. Anyone dumb and fervent enough to take their ideologies and tie them to their businesses, deserve what they get. It's not like liberals are looking at every charity Chick fil A is giving to, and nitpicking where the charity money goes by the penny. I think Kilhic is right; I guess we have nothing better to do. Thankfully, I'd take that over 'tribal' conflicts, fundamentalist self dealt justice, and bride kidnappings any day.

(February 27, 2014 at 9:57 pm)Asimm Wrote: Yes cause over population effects no country ever.
Those countries with really low numbers of contraception also go by another name, we call them third world countries.

Abortion isn't a form of contraception, douche.

(February 27, 2014 at 10:19 pm)Napoléon Wrote: I actually agree with the captain. While I think the reasons for boycotting are ludicrous, it's well within their right to simply not buy cookies. I'm sure if the funds from those cookies were going to "pro-life" causes people would strangely have a different opinion simply because it coincides with their own views.

Of course they've got a right to not buy cookies. And I have a right to draw attention and laugh at them because they're publicizing all this based on, literally, no factual reason. To be clear, the money from girl scout cookies isn't going to either side of the abortion issue, because the girl scouts are not guilty of the thing the right wing is alleging they've done.

To say this is about cookies or abortion is missing the point; this is about the complete dearth of facts in yet another oversensitive, right wing outrage dance.

(February 27, 2014 at 9:44 pm)Aractus Wrote: Oh and FYI it's illegal in Australia for any company (/organization) to organize/arrange for a boycott of a product - don't you have these laws in the USA? The purpose of the law is, for instance that a competitor - or entity with a competing interest - is not allowed to drive business away from a target company. Thus we typically see petitions and not illegal boycotts...

In the US most "boycotts" are simply a request to consumers in general, and rarely are organized beyond that. Since companies will occasionally give in to the threat of bad publicity (moreso than the concern over sales lost due to a boycott), the call for boycotts is usually as far as it goes. Based on the Cookie Cott site, that's all that it is.

I think they're killing themselves with the name, though. I read "cookie cott" and I think of a bed for cookies. And I'm thinking that asking Americans to stop buying cookies that we can stuff into our fat faces is probably not going to work, either.

Wow, I missed a lot....

I have no qualms with the boy scouts. Why was the boy scouts brought up? Did I typo? hmmm.

Honestly, I think its pathetic for a group of adults no matter what political affiliation to target a children's group. They won't lose much money on cookie sales but it's the principle of the fact.

And what is this about sensitive liberals?

I am not a sensitive liberal... I may be sensitive but I ain't no liberal.

(February 28, 2014 at 4:50 am)Aractus Wrote:

(February 27, 2014 at 9:57 pm)Asimm Wrote: Yes cause over population effects no country ever.
Those countries with really low numbers of contraception also go by another name, we call them third world countries.

Abortion isn't a form of contraception, douche.

No your right, I should have said the countries with poor numbers of planned parenthood, that in turn will do nothing but help a population. Which include abortion.

(February 28, 2014 at 6:21 am)Esquilax Wrote: And I have a right to draw attention and laugh at them because they're publicizing all this based on, literally, no factual reason. To be clear, the money from girl scout cookies isn't going to either side of the abortion issue, because the girl scouts are not guilty of the thing the right wing is alleging they've done.

I guess I missed the part where this was apparent.

(February 28, 2014 at 12:26 pm)Asimm Wrote: No your right, I should have said the countries with poor numbers of planned parenthood, that in turn will do nothing but help a population. Which include abortion.

Of course I'm right.

My actual issue with your argument is in the way that you see abortion somehow related to "population control" and contraception. What is needed most to address these issues is education and it is in fact needed even more than contraception, which is also needed. But contraception itself does nothing without proper education and teaching people in the third world why they should want to raise only 1 child instead of 10-20 children as is their traditional wisdom of "survival of the fittest" or "the more babies I have the more likely one will survive to adulthood".

And my argument to sum it up for you is that preventing unplanned pregnancies is always a far better option then terminating them, and that termination leads to long term psychological and psychophysiological disorders, and thus adoption is a preferred option to avoid these. And that's backed up by facts and not emotion/opinion.

Are girl scout cookies available yet? Now that I no longer work with a GS mom, I never remember when their sale starts exactly. Now you've all got me craving Thin Mints. I'll have to go buy some of the Keebler rip offs (Grasshoppers).

Yes they are.

Saw them at my local grocery store and emptied my wallet. Munchies FTW!