Protesting to those promoting pornography

Submit ALERTS or ACTION ITEMS on what we can do to support Freedom. (i.e. action regarding a bill or other important issue)
Post Reply
User avatar
AussieOi
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6137
Location: Sydney, Australia

Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by AussieOi »

As a customer of a significant hotel chain (spent $10k + in November alone) I will be contacting Marriott hotels to express my disappointment that they willingly provide Hard Core Pornography through their owned and franchise hotels for the motive of profit making and to subsidise the cost of other movies they also sell.

I believe this reflects poorly on their name, is not an action an ethical company should undertake and most distubingly willfully promotes and facilitates damaging outcomes.

As both a concerned parent, citizen and customer this is an action being expressed to_THE COMPANY.

I will be posting to the Chairman and CEO of Marriott International who has a blog which he describes as an interactive forum which welcomes discussion- even on uncomfortable topics.

Pornography_the carrier_is big business. It is Mafia-spawned. It is contagious. It is addicting. We know how damaging it is.

Apathy toward pornography stems mostly from a widespread public attitude that it is a victimless crime......and the huge financial rewards far outweigh the risks.

The FBI points out that pornography may have a direct relationship to sex crimes. “In one large western city,” an agency report states, “the vice squad advised that 72 percent of the individuals arrested for rape and child-related sexual offenses had in their possession some type of pornographic material.”

As Elder Oaks instructs us, ....do not patronize pornography. Do not use your purchasing power to support moral degradation.

I am doing this because I wish to protect my loved ones and our environment from the onslaught of pornography that threatens our spirituality, our marriages, and our children

AussieOi

=================================================================================

Why do I Blog....by Bill Marriott, Chairman and CEO of Marriott International
http://www.blogs.marriott.com/personal/ ... tem=665191

.................There's been a lot of talk and coverage recently about a fellow CEO online who was posting some not-so-nice stuff about his competition. It seems that today, the business world is becoming much more transparent, thanks in large part to the Internet.

All this got me thinking, "Why do I blog?" Well, I've been doing it now for six months and I've found it's a great learning experience and I've had a lot of fun doing it. I'm sure you probably have learned a lot about me. I do value family, work and community, and I'm not afraid to tackle controversial topics such as reforming our immigration policy or putting our non-smoking policy in our hotels in the United States and Canada. I like to talk about good news, but I'm not afraid to talk about the bad news, such as my blog about the bombing of our Islamabad hotel.

Businesses must have values and I've tried to communicate some of ours in my blog. We certainly do have a growing commitment to saving the environment. Many of you offered praise in your comments; others want us to do even more.

Sometimes I've asked others to communicate the company's values on the blog. It was wonderful to read the comments about Valerie McSwain. She's the concierge at the Washington, D.C. Marriott who was supporting her family on welfare before she got an opportunity with us. She's a superstar. Education and diversity are also very important values for our company.

When your family's name is on the building or you are the person clearly identified with the company, everything you say or do affects the business, good or bad. In this fascinating information age, you certainly have to be transparent.

I'm Bill Marriott and thanks for helping me keep Marriott on the move.

==========================================

User avatar
Col. Flagg
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 16961
Location: Utah County

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by Col. Flagg »

Amen Aussie! We actually had a small movie rental business in the small town I live in (Lehi, UT) back in the late '90's (Movie Buffs) that rented X rated videos and it went on for about 2 years until the city council rec'd too many complaints about it at city council meetings and so they decided to revoke their license. The thing I don't get about porn is what makes it so appealing to some people? I've come across porn sites several times by accident while online and it isn't hard to do... just type in a popular URL wrong and who knows what you'll get, but it is some of the most vile, disgusting crap I've ever seen... some of it makes you want to throw up. Anyone who decides to take on this stuff head on has my blessing and admiration. Go Aussie! :D

User avatar
MasterOfNone
captain of 100
Posts: 415

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by MasterOfNone »

And now full-body scanners at airports will be generating images of pornography (including that of youth/children)....which will no doubt find its way into the market or for the lusts of those who control the system...

Alex Jones has a piece and video on it:
http://www.infowars.com/body-scanners-i ... ate-media/
WARNING: body scan images on site.

User avatar
AussieOi
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6137
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by AussieOi »

Col. Flagg wrote:Amen Aussie! We actually had a small movie rental business in the small town I live in (Lehi, UT) back in the late '90's (Movie Buffs) that rented X rated videos and it went on for about 2 years until the city council rec'd too many complaints about it at city council meetings and so they decided to revoke their license.
thats VERY interesting. it would suggest there are by-laws that the local city council can use against businesses that rent out x-rated material for a fee. on that basis a few - ahem- hotels might be able to receive a letter from their council- provided- residents write to complain.

Col. Flagg wrote:The thing I don't get about porn is what makes it so appealing to some people? I've come across porn sites several times by accident while online and it isn't hard to do... just type in a popular URL wrong and who knows what you'll get, but it is some of the most vile, disgusting crap I've ever seen... some of it makes you want to throw up.

Ah well there’s your stroke of good fortune Col.

You just haven’t stumbled upon anything that turns you on yet

My advice there: stay that way!!

Everyone’s got their niggle and I reckon there’s a lot of people who’d tell you to be thankful that one ain’t yours


Everyone has a niggle to work through. anyone who says they dont have one is either lying, in denial, or a robot. the quest is to overcome that desire.

that is why i find it repugnant there are those willing to traffic in this material for gain and filthy lucre. a hotel room with the smut 1 easy, anonymous click away, where the bulk of customers are married fathers away from home on business is nothing more than entrapment, exploitation and facilitation.

These are probably fathers and husbands doing their best to avoid the stuff. not going out at night because what is the entertaiunment out there- Casinos' nighclubs, bars and strip clubs. So they get a meal at some restaurant by themselves, stay in and watch TV and there it is- BANG right in their face.

It is a snare that the adversary would put in his top 5 achievements- if we are to believe that a) Porn is more harmful to the soul than drugs and 2) The adversary is doing all he can to damage families.

Imagine if there was a mini-bar in each hotel room with Heroin, Coke, Ice and Marijuana in it....and the mini-bar invoice says "your selection will not be recorded on your invoice". Well Elder Oaks tells us explicitly (in my posts that were deleted into the Memory hole here) that Pornography is MORE danaging that drugs.

And some establishments aimed at families have a cathode ray delivery system right into our faces purely for a profit motive. Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We should have no part in supporting such establishments.

I only wish I knew this BEFORE i booked my holiday to the USA.

Like
Member
Posts: 2358

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by Like »

AussieOi, I saw this and I thought you may be interested:
Marriott board helps fellow Mormon Romney -- gives up porn

First, Mitt Romney resigned from the board of Marriott, after serving for many years while the hotel chain made millions and millions of dollars from in-room porn. There is no evidence that Romney complained about the practice when he was in a position to do something about it, despite the fact that pornography is contrary to the values of the Mormon church.

Romney, who has been desperately and unpersuasively trying to pass himself off as a champion of conservative moral values after supporting abortion for most of his political career and single-handedly legalizing homosexual marriage in Massachusetts, had been rightly criticized for looking the other way while the fellow Mormons who dominate the Marriott board made a killing preying on the moral weakness of its guests.

Now the board, in what appears to be a transparent attempt to boost Mitt's chances in 2012, has decided to drop porn from its new properties, and intends to phase out porn in existing hotels starting in 2013. That's a convenient date — if Romney fails in his White House bid, the board can phase it right back in.

Romney is polling well right now, but is avoiding the Tea Party like the bubonic plague. He doesn't want to get anywhere near them, and he doesn't want them to get anywhere near him. His conversion to social conservatism smacks of convenience rather than conviction. Mitt's problem is not that he's a Mormon; it's that he's not Mormon enough. Bottom line: Romney has no credibility on social issues. Are Republican voters paying attention?

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/110124" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
AussieOi
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6137
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by AussieOi »

thanks for the heads up
very happy to hear
clearly an admission that they know its wrong
sad that they have got themselves signed into contracts they can't wriggle out of that means they have to peddle porn for years to come
great start, but what it says is that they value money more than right
you know, the rich man and jesus, go and sell all your possessions give to the poor
IF they had to make good on forgone revenue to the Porn companies, then they aren't preapred to walk away- which is the right thing- and pay out those contracts, or, accept alternative movies and pay the difference (or pocket th eprofits if more people wached family movies)
it says to me one of 2 things- 1) that they made dirty dirty deals for money and profit, knowing what they were doing, or 2) they are just cleaning up for the Mutt campaign

here is where it will get interesting. IF the decision was about shareholders, and the owners making their own decisions, then this statement is redundant. the shareholders will kick up a stink about this, or, the owners will say you can't phase them out

anyway, we know the truth. we've read the agreements. they CAN shut it down, tomorrow, if they really want to. but they don't

still, this is a start. a very small, token, pathetic guesture, a small admission, but a start nonetheless

i'll take it

the Marriott name is still mud to me, i read his press release reasons for it, nothing has changed, he hasn't donated the money he made form human misery to sex abuse victims and sex trafficked women over in asia and eastern europe.

imagine selling drugs to children and saying "we won't be selling drugs to kids from 2013" yeah, get real

Like
Member
Posts: 2358

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by Like »

Hopefully the change is a unconditional permanent one.

User avatar
AussieOi
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6137
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by AussieOi »

Mazal wrote:Hopefully the change is a unconditional permanent one.

i told my girlfriend we would not be fornicating when we were married.
she was happy with that
of course it was 2 years away
that was a decision too
it was a right decision too
it was a permanent decision too
there was nothing wrong with the decision too

HeirofNumenor
the Heir Of Numenor
Posts: 4229
Location: UT

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by HeirofNumenor »

***THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE A JUSTIFICATION OF WHY THE MARRIOTT HOTELS SHOW PORN, WHEN THE CONTROLLING FAMILY AND LEGACY NAME ARE MORMON***
It IS however, an attempt to understand their reasoning, and upon what is that founded.

This appears to be the controlling legal authority (to borrow from Al Gore) as to explain why porn is carried by Marriott:
Dodge v. Ford Motor Company
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dodge v. Ford Motor Company, 204 Mich. 459, 170 N.W. 668. (Mich. 1919), is an old case in which the Michigan Supreme Court held that Henry Ford owed a duty to the shareholders of the Ford Motor Company to operate his business to profit his shareholders, rather than the community as a whole or employees. It is often cited as embodying the principle of "shareholder value" in companies.

The case has not represented the present law in the United States generally, or Delaware in particular, for over thirty years. It has not, however, been overruled.

The Court held that a business corporation is organized primarily for the profit of the stockholders, as opposed to the community or its employees. The discretion of the directors is to be exercised in the choice of means to attain that end, and does not extend to the reduction of profits or the nondistribution of profits among stockholders in order to benefit the public, making the profits of the stockholders incidental thereto.

Because this company was in business for profit, Ford could not turn it into a charity. This was compared to a spoilation of the company's assets.

**********************************************

This case is frequently cited as support for the idea that "corporate law requires boards of directors to maximize shareholder wealth." The following articles attempt to refute that interpretation.

"Among non-experts, conventional wisdom holds that corporate law requires boards of directors to maximize shareholder wealth. This common but mistaken belief is almost invariably supported by reference to the Michigan Supreme Court's 1919 opinion in Dodge v. Ford Motor Co."

"Dodge is often misread or mistaught as setting a legal rule of shareholder wealth maximization. This was not and is not the law. Shareholder wealth maximization is a standard of conduct for officers and directors, not a legal mandate. The business judgment rule [which was also upheld in this decision] protects many decisions that deviate from this standard."
[Sadly, despite the arguments that this is NOT The sate of US corporate law in the United States, the sad reality is that it is just that - the only thing that matters is that you make as much money as possible for the stockholders, and THIS is the ONLY duty that matters, aside from obeying the law (unless you are an insider and the secret combinations rescue/excuse you).]

The other telling point about this what type of stockholders. I always thought it meant that so long as you maintained control over 50% plus 1 of the shares, you could do what you wanted...but this case from Michigan had the state Supreme Court siding with the minority shareholders (Ford never lost control of his company).

Recently, Mark Cuban, owner of the NBA team Dallas Mavericks, tried to buy about 10% or stock in Overstock.com, in an attempt to impose his will upon the LDS businessmen who own Overstock. He claims he can make it more profitable (probably by doing some very shady things - IMHO). Cuban is the guy who made his fortune in his 20's by inventing streaming video and selling it to Yahoo...which of course has led to a ton of uses, including porn applications (not necessarily his fault, but still...). Cuban went so far to publish quite ab bit of articles blasting Overstock's management, in an attempt to drive down prices and induce share holders to sell, so that he could buy their stock and get a stronger position to ram his will down the throats of Overstock management.

Yes, it seems the ONLY safe way to keep crap out of your company is to never sell stock, but to always keep ALL control completely in the family.

Back to Marriott...

I am sure the Marriott family is highly uncomfortable with selling porn in their hotels. They WANT to get rid of it, but appear to be legally forbidden from doing so. This latest story re: phasing out of porn is a godsend to them, because it allows the shareholders to realize for themselves that they are NOT making any money off it.


Rather than casting stones, we should be THANKING them for being willing to get rid of the porn.


I liken this to something Cleon Skousen quoted about the ending of slavery in The Making of America (p.737 (728-737)). Basically, had the South NOT succeeded because the Republican Party and Lincoln won the presidency in 1860, due to economics, population growth, an the anti-importation clause of the Constitution, slavery would have been too expensive to maintain, and all the slaves would have been freed by 1900, avoiding the backlash caused by the Civil War, Military Occupation, and Reconstruction. In this same section, Dr. Skousen writes that for the early before 1830, many of the southern states were considering abandoning slavery, but it was because of the radical and sometimes violent nature of the northern abolitionists that the southern states became scared of what might happen, so they tightened their grip and became more rigid in their defense of slavery. The reaction is kind like what happens when that jerk-pastor from Kansas shows up at military funerals saying God hates the soldier who died, God hates Fags, etc. He gives most Christians a bad name, and hardens the hearts of those who might be willing to let go of bad policies. Remember that part of the success the gay rights movement has had in America is that some 10 years ago, two Wyoming cowboys beat to death a college student named Matthew Shepherd because he was gay. This galvanized the gay community and gained massive sympathy from the general public.

Not a perfect parallel, I know...


AGAIN:

Rather than casting stones, we should be THANKING them for being willing to get rid of the porn.

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by lundbaek »

From a member of our ward today:

"Its that time of year again for the Swimsuit Edition of Sport Illustrated. I was just at Frys and there they had it at the check out. It was placed lower than other years but still at the eye height of a 4 year old. Just as I have done every year I spoke with the store manager. I told her how I enjoyed shopping at Frys but I had a concern I need her to hear. I told her that the Swimsuit edition of Sport Illustrated is pornography and is in the view of children at the Check out. I told her if they had to carry it that it needed to be with the other magazines where someone would have to go look for it. I explained to her that I work with addiction support groups and that pornography is destroying marriages, families and individuals. I asked if she would remove them. Just as in other years she was very nice and said she would have them removed to where they had the cover over them that blocked out the picture.

"Each of us represents a certain amount of people that feel the same way. I would invite you to express you concerns about this magazine to the store manager if you see it out in the open. If you don’t, then we can tell them how much we appreciate them keeping it out of view from our children and family members. I truly believe there are others who feel the same way we do but feel like they have to so along with “the way things are.” Our voice can help strengthen theirs.

"Yesterday I learned of a sweet family I know who have just recently divorce due to the husband’s problem with pornography. We have got to protect our families."

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Protesting to those promoting pornography

Post by Fiannan »

"Yesterday I learned of a sweet family I know who have just recently divorce due to the husband’s problem with pornography. We have got to protect our families."
No better way to protect a family than to kick the father out. But seriously, come on...children from fractured families are far more likely to engage in sex at a younger age than the national norm, are more likely to experiment with drugs and are more exposed to molestation (step parents, boy/girl friends of the custodial parent, etc.) and from my observations almost every kid in my stake where a divorce takes place has now left the Church.

Post Reply