roaringmouse

That was just an extreme example I used to highlight what a largely pointless activity it is to simply not go to a particular shop for their coffee. (As a very minor sidepoint, I did say bordering on the hypocritical - I didn't say people were hypocrits.)
Depends on who "we" is and what "their" values are - not sure you can talk for everyone, as there are other examples too that some people might prefer not to fund. Such as coffee shops run to fund the Church of the Atheist with their Bishop Richard Dawkins.

soapy©

YES!
anyone whos anti anything
i'm anti them lol

fish.01

The "we" is the boycotters in the thread you directed your statement at. The "their" refers to the company owners who funded and took part in extreme christianity to the detriment of the vulnerable.

From your post I have a sneaking suspicion I guessed the basis of your objection correctly

roaringmouse

Then you would be wrong.

fish.01

We have something in common after all

lapin_windstar

Your argument is complete toss, though. You initial rhetorical question was based on entirely false premises.

Stopping using an entire life-sustaining commodity because you disagree with the political/religious activities of some of its producers up the production chain is not comparable to not buying a luxury item from one specific retailer because you disagree with those specific owners' political/religious activities. They're not comparable in substance, principle or practice. The analogy is inapt and inept.

soapy©

dont you love it when people turn a thread into their own personal argument lol
thats it i'm Boycotting this thread

moneypenny20

It's a good job I only boycott them because they're crap. I don't have to worry about oil

roaringmouse

We're in trouble when oil runs out then, eh? No more oil, no more life apparently.

DeadVim

I'm boycotting Geoffrey Boycott.

On-topic: I'm a Levis kind of guy.

lesleys

90% of the world's oil does not come from Saudi Arabia.

soapy©

thank **** for that, too bloody long to drive to fill up