UPDATE: Folks, please note that some of the designs that you’re finding as “still there” are simply thumbnails that haven’t yet churned out of our Marketplace. If you click on them, you’ll most likely find that the products themselves are no longer available. The thumbnails themselves will also disappear shortly thereafter.
Please understand that, given our size and the sheer number of people adding content to our site on a daily basis, you may run across a design that has been only recently pended. If you refresh your browser and take a breather, in short order you’ll find that that design has been yanked by our team.
Thanks!
–
This morning we made the decision to remove all Psalms 109:8 designs from CafePress.
The public debate started with questioning if the design was simply intended to be criticism of the President or something much worse. The discourse was surprisingly civil online, given the heated nature of the topic. Given that, and the positions of groups like the ACLU and the Anti-Defamation League, we decided to let the dialogue play out publicly before making a final decision.
Last night we posted a poll on our blog, read through the emails we’ve received and weighed the nature of the calls we’ve received on the topic. In the process we also learned that many of the original designers of the Psalm 109:8 designs had already decided to remove them on their own.
General consensus has proven that the design does point to a broader interpretation of the Psalm and thus has been deemed inappropriate for sale at CafePress.
We try to create an atmosphere of self-expression. Many of the things we encounter are not black and white, but grey. When the dialogue is civil, we want to let the larger community work things out rather than making an uninformed ruling. The dialogue has played out and common sentiment has reached agreement – this merchandise is not appropriate.
UPDATE 11/20: Please see the updated Psalm 109:8 post. Thanks, all, for your civil input on this heated topic.
Over the last 10 years, we at CafePress have become accustomed to the T-shirt being a springboard for people to express their views – including those that are political, religious and various combinations of the two. The discussions that result from these designs can initiate healthy political dialogue or debate and, sometimes, strong criticism.
The past couple of days have illustrated this point rather clearly, as user-designed merchandise with “Pray for Obama – Psalm 109:8” has come to public attention.
When folks started talking about the Obama Psalm 109:8 merchandise, we weren’t particularly shocked to find that a T-shirt had caused heated political discourse. What did catch our attention, though, were the folks claiming that Psalm 109:8 was being used to advocate Barack Obama’s assassination.
We take our Content Usage policy seriously here, and no content that advocates the harming of any human being is acceptable. But is that what Psalm 109:8 is trying to convey in the context of a T-shirt?
Psalm 109:8 states: Let his days be few; Let another take his office.
To date we have treated these designs much in the same way we took the “No W” and “Impeach Bush” merchandise. But does it mean something more?
As the leaders in User Generated Commerce we strive to manage our content in a way that protects self-expression and free speech, while also making sure that we’re not allowing the promotion of violence.
Sometimes, though, iconography and words can take on new meaning over time – and this is often as a result of public discourse. If we see that the overall public discourse has determined that the meaning of this use of Psalm 109:8 goes beyond it’s literal meaning, and is being construed as threatening to the President, we will revisit our decision to allow the designs.
We’d love for you to weigh in on the Psalm 109:8 designs:
To see how experts – including representatives from the ACLU and the Anti Defamation League – have weighed in on the subject, check out this article.
Strike Maine off the list of states that recognize same-sex marriage. Today, the political consultants that brought Proposition 8 to California (Schubert/Flint) had another success with Question 1 in Maine. Like its California counterpart, Question 1 overturned the previous rights of same-sex couples to marry.
Both initiatives were based on the premise that gay marriage is harmful to traditional marriage, with very similar websites highlighting the ill-effects that legal same-sex unions will have on this country’s children. Like the Protect Marriage site (California), the Stand for Marriage Maine site has a variety of video and calls-to-action focused on mobilizing supporters to rescue marriage from the calamitous harm that would befall society should homosexual unions be legally recognized.
One man, though, doesn’t think that Schubert/Flint is being effective enough. He too has a website with a variety of video and calls-to-action, all focused around protecting our country’s children and restoring traditional marriage.
That man is John Marcotte of Rescue Marriage, who was disappointed by Proposition 8 due to its inability to actually protect traditional marriage from anything but gay people. Marcotte notes that the true enemy of marriage is divorce, and therefore seeks to save the institution by outlawing divorce in the state of California.
Marcotte, of course, wasted no time in setting up a CafePress shop so that like-minded supporters can raise awareness of his worthy cause. In addition to the shop, Marcotte has also arranged a Wedding March on the Capitol, to be held in Sacramento on November 14, 2009.
Whether Marcotte will follow in the footsteps of Schubert/Flint and clone his pro-marriage initiative in Maine at some point is TBD.
Incidentally, the people of Maine did pass a medical marijuana bill along with Question 1. So if you’re gay and in Maine, you still can’t get married – but if this news sends you into uncontrollable depression, insomnia or premature glaucoma, you do have a new resource available to help numb the pain.
Sarah Palin inspired T-shirt designers like no other Vice Presidential candidate ever has, with Sarah Palin T-shirts and other groovy gifts numbering over 1 million.
Perhaps our fondest memory of Sarah Palin is the Great Moose Bag Sighting, which led some folks to design rebuttal bags on behalf of the moose and moved us to recommend a Sarah Palin costume for Halloween. Since we’re recommending random Halloween costumes this week (yesterday’s suggestion: be the “Saw” franchise), today we’ll revisit last year’s Palin plan with some slight alterations.
How to be Sarah Palin for Halloween this year:
Swap out the business suit for a snow-machine suit (easily obtainable on the cheap at larger thrift shops) and stuff your pockets full of dollar bills. Don’t forget your moose bag and your glasses, though.
Mock up a few fake copies of “Going Rogue” to hand out to screaming fans, and bring a pen to sign them. (Yep, we make books. No, we are not advocating trademark infringement. Call the book whatever you’d like, or just carry Dr. Seuss’s “My Book About Me” for kicks.)
Engage friends to be your screaming literary fans. It’s an easy costume for them; we have tons of flair that they can wear to express their love for all things Palin (read: you).
Just don’t forget your lipstick. Extra bonus points to anyone who brings their pit bull and lipstick – but unless the lipstick is bacon-flavored, please do keep it off your dog. (And if you find bacon-flavored lipstick, please let us know. That would be a find.)
Obama gave a speech back in February wherein he laid out plans to cap the pay and bonuses of executives working for companies who received taxpayer-funded federal bailout money, noting that such executives could still receive compensation (like options) tied to the long-term health of the company. The move was in response to events like the AIG fiasco that occurred after the first round of Bush bailout money.
This week, the Federal Reserve “pay czar” Kenneth Feinberg – hired to oversee the companies who took the bailout money – issued a set of guidelines (The White House likes the term “formula” and “guidelines” better than “pay cap”) aimed to limit the pay at 7 firms who received the most bailout money. The White House ordered what’s being described as “drastic” pay cuts for 175 top executives at these companies, which are: AIG, Citigroup, Bank of America, GM, Chrysler, and the financing departments of the two automakers. However, it’s worth noting that the guidelines don’t specifically prohibit multi-million dollar paychecks or substantial deferred compensation.
Said Obama in a speech, “I’ve always believed that our system of free enterprise works best when it rewards hard work. But it does offend our values when executives of big financial firms — firms that are struggling — pay themselves huge bonuses even as they continue to rely on taxpayer assistance to stay afloat.”
The Fed also noted that it would begin reviewing compensation practices at some our largest largest financial firms. In its guidelines the Fed stated, “Banking organizations too often rewarded employees for increasing the firm’s revenue or short-term profit without adequate recognition of the risks the employees’ activities posed to the firm.”
The Fed also noted that the hope is for other banking institutions to adopt the “pay cut model” in an effort to focus on long-term profitability and stability, rather than short-term cash.
Such is the argument made by the folks over at Rescue Marriage, who have authored the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act. Inspired by the passage of California’s Proposition 8, which was promoted and funded by the Protect Marriage camp to “restore marriage and protect California children,” Rescue Marriage founder John Marcotte realized that truly protecting marriage meant going well beyond limiting its legal status to heterosexuals.
Marcotte sees the primary threat to marriage as the dissolution thereof, and therefore seeks to protect the sanctity of marriage by outlawing divorce in the state of California.
To help get the word out, Marcotte started the Rescue Marriage T-shirt shop so that supporters can show the world that they truly stand behind government-mandated marriage protection.
We spoke with Marcotte, and asked him whether or not he thought this bill would pass. His answer: “Proposition 8 passed on the grounds that it protects traditional marriage and our children, so I don’t see any reason that this bill – which truly protects marriage by preventing its demise – wouldn’t pass. I mean, if all the people who voted for Proposition 8 don’t vote for this, they’d be hypocrites. You don’t think that California voters are hypocrites, do you?”
The Rescue Marriage camp has organized a Wedding March on the Capitol to be held on November 14th, 2009. The march invites all of us to “Participate in democracy the American way: by shouting angrily, using inflammatory rhetoric and memorizing jingoistic slogans to chant or misspell on signs.”
Whether the people of California will take this next step in preserving traditional marriage has yet to be seen. Some residents have expressed that banning divorce infringes on their civil rights; to those people, Marcotte says, “Sometimes other people have to give up their rights in order to protect my idea of traditional marriage.”
UPDATE: Rescue Marriage has a new Public Service Announcement to explain the issue:
Obama’s surprise Nobel Peace Prize win last week created an unprecedented uproar of conflicting popular opinion, and the designs keep coming in as the debate over the award continues.
As the Nobel committee staunchly stands behind their decision, public opinion flares wildly on both sides. To date the CafePress community has brought about 7,000 Obama Nobel Peace Prize products to life – 57% supporting and 43% opposing the prize.
Perhaps more significant, though, is the foresight of the CafePress community. The Obama/peace theme isn’t a new one ’round these parts; we saw this trend from the get-go when Obama merchandise started to hit the catalogue. Since early 2008, customers have flocked to merchandise featuring the iconic Obama “O” transformed into a peace sign, as well as with the similar messages of “hope” and “change.” With over 180,000 Obama/Peace products made before the award, the feeling that Obama would be the President to leave a legacy of peace speaks loud and clear on the T-shirts. This flavor of candidate messaging was a new one; a search for peace-related President George W. Bush merchandise turns up 375,000 products, mostly displaying ironic messages of war and impeachment.
As the battle of public opinion rages on, we’ll continue to see folks inserting themselves into the social consciousness of this historical moment (and others to come) by making bolder, louder statements via the almighty T-shirt.
March organizers Equality Across America to demand equal civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people across the nation. They also set up a shop with cool National Equality March T-shirts and gear so activists could sport their support for a good cause.
The march followed a Human Rights Campaign dinner that included remarks from President Obama, who promised to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and voiced general support for the gay equal rights movement. More specific issues of timelines and legal actions weren’t covered, but the ever-arresting Lady Gaga (who had the night before performed at the HRC dinner) made sure that the President knew that the finer points needed to be addressed by saying, “Obama, I know you are listening… We will continue to push you and your administration to bring your words of promise to a reality.”
In a decision that surprised many (including Obama himself), the President received this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel committee noted that their decision to award the prize to a President just 10 months into office was based on his efforts to boost diplomacy and co-operation.
Said the Norwegian committee, “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.”
Obama, for his part, seemed humbled by the award and expressed that this prize is a call-to-action, saying “I know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievements. It’s also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st Century.”
Of course, the decision is not without its critics. The Taliban, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Republic National Committee Chairman Michael Steele have all made statements criticizing the committee’s decision. Other world leaders (and John McCain, departing from other GOP members) were more supportive of the decision.
The merchandise being designed thus far is more celebratory than derogatory, which isn’t a surprise; Obama was from the beginning a candidate that inspired a lot of peace-themed T-shirts.
And so we congratulate the President today on bringing American leadership to recognition on the world stage, and award him a Fantasy T-Wearer Award with the Obama Peace Sign T-shirt, seen above at right.
The battle over the Mojave Memorial Cross saw the inside of the Supreme Court this week, as the Justices began to ponder the Constitutionality of a cross residing on public lands.
Congress at one point tried to transfer the land around the cross to veteran’s groups in order to eliminate and Establishment Clause violations, but that attempt was blocked. At this point it seems that the Supreme Court mayrule on the transfer of the lands to a private group rather than the Constitutionality of the cross itself, rather than setting a precedent that might affect other such lands (Arlington National Cemetery being the most obvious).
Justice Anthony Scalia was particularly fired up, noting, “I don’t think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead that that cross honors are the Christian war dead. I think that’s an outrageous conclusion.”
The folks at Liberty Legal who started the donttearmedown.com site (and shop) were encouraged by a Barna poll, which concludes that 92% of Americans feel the cross should stay.
It is worth noting that the cross, which is indeed a Christian symbol, is actually an ancient symbol used by many people and religions. Justice Scalia pointed out that the cross is meant to honor all war dead – not just the Christian ones. But, as ACLU counsel Peter Eliasberg pointed out, “I have been in Jewish cemeteries. There is never a cross on a tombstone of a Jew.”
The ruling for case 08-472 isn’t expected until early next year. In the meantime, the cross stays (boarded up).
