I believe you'll find there's a sizable difference between using boycotts to silence someone and using them to give someone a voice.

A boycott is not a principle unto itself. It's more like a neutral facilitator of a given principle. In this case, it was encouraging free speech. In a typical case involving GLAAD, it's used to suppress speech--which is exactly what they tried to do with Robertson.

No need to obfuscate. Just be a graceful loser and move on to the next GLAAD skirmish.

Last edited by Pariah; 2013-12-28 1:25 AM.