What are the specific lab content policies?

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

By the way, call me a geek but something i do NOT like to transfer are bullfights. It makes me almost sick, seeing the poor animals get tortured to death.

I do it however because there is no telling what will come after the bullfight, and frankly it is not my business telling people what to film, it isn´t illegal. But it should be, it is disgusting.

It´s kinda sitting there... is all the blood red enough... and seeing them suffer as the crazy mob yells all around. Bullfights are sick, I tell you.

But if they tortured some other animals for hours I´m not sure I would transfer it, it is disgusting to see.

[Evan Kubota]

Do you get a lot of bullfights? I respect your fortitude in transferring them regardless. It's interesting how longstanding traditions can frequently conflict with modern value alterations. I'd reminded of the annual dolphin harvests on an island near Japan where they round them into small fjords and cut at them with sickles until the animals die and they can section them in the water then load them into their boats. Greenpeace has been soiling themselves over it, but washing visceral, apparently cruel traditions away only sets the stage for more subtle and transgressive horrors...

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Yeah, enough for me. All the tourists had to see a bullfight I guess. :roll:
Just guessing, I have probalby transferres about 15 clients that had bullfights. Maybe more. ...probably more.

[VideoFred]

Kent, you're my man.
No need to torture animals.
Yes, it's disgusting.

Now, about Mormons etc....
As long as they do not force us to believe what they believe we should leave them alone. They have the right to believe whatever they want.
They also have the right to refuse whatever they want.
If you don't like them, don't do business with them.
It's as simple as that.

Fred.

[audadvnc]

As long as they don't force us to believe what they believe we should leave them alone

Ah, there's a problem. They sincerely want to force others to believe what they do, and are doing everything they can to make it happen. "Talk radio" is one of their tools; they make no bones about their propagandistic intent. I work in a hotel where neocons and religious right wingers hold conventions, and have heard some hair curling stuff lately. Good thing I keep my hair really short so they can't see my reaction.

[Evan Kubota]

"They sincerely want to force others to believe what they do, and are doing everything they can to make it happen."

Exactly. These aren't people that would be happy to simply leave others alone, which is the kind of self-respect that you'd come to expect but which is unfortunately absent from other people. 'Evangelical' religions were so named for a reason...

[MovieStuff]

These aren't people that would be happy to simply leave others alone, which is the kind of self-respect that you'd come to expect but which is unfortunately absent from other people.....

I know what you mean. Don't you hate it when someone tries to change your beliefs and make you do something that you don't agree with? ;)

Roger

[Evan Kubota]

Yeah, I'm dragging them kicking and screaming into the film transfer business :roll: Keep your religious beliefs out of your public transactions and there's no conflict...

[MovieStuff]

Yeah, I'm dragging them kicking and screaming into the film transfer business :roll: Keep your religious beliefs out of your public transactions and there's no conflict...

I'm sure they feel exactly the same about you!

Roger

[Mitch Perkins]

As long as they don't force us to believe what they believe we should leave them alone

Ah, there's a problem. They sincerely want to force others to believe what they do, and are doing everything they can to make it happen. "Talk radio" is one of their tools; they make no bones about their propagandistic intent. I work in a hotel where neocons and religious right wingers hold conventions, and have heard some hair curling stuff lately. Good thing I keep my hair really short so they can't see my reaction.

This was the reason for my involvement in the last thread on this subject. It's an extremely pressing issue in the US, at least.
It's why "go somewhere else" doesn't cut it; at the very least, folks need to keep an open dialogue about the growing threat of right-wing religious nutters. They're not coming, they're here, and they are very scary.

That said, Roger is right. The problem is he's taking a short-sighted, simplistic view of a far-reaching, complex issue. No, Yale is not breaking the law, and yes, they are free to refuse to handle certain types of footage, but I don't think that's what has people responding here - I think it's what their choices are based on, their reasons, that *scare* people. Those reasons represent a mindset people have fought long and hard from which to free themselves.
So I don't think it does any good to dismiss open dialogue on this issue by pointing to Yale's obvious rights, or to simply say, "go somewhere else". Folks here aren't just griping or stupid - they're *concerned*, as well they should be.

"When the theologian governed the world, it was covered with huts and
hovels for the many, palaces and cathedrals for the few. To nearly all
the children of men, reading and writing were unknown arts. The poor
were clad in rags and skins - they devoured crusts, and gnawed bones.
The day of Science dawned, and the luxuries of a century ago are the
necessities of to-day. Men in the middle ranks of life have more of the
conveniences and elegancies than the princes and kings of the
theological times. But above and over all this, is the development of
mind. ... These benefits did not drop from the outstretched hands of
priests. ... They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer, nor
did they come in answer to superstitious supplication. They are the
children of freedom, the gifts of reason, observation and experience
- and for them all, man is indebted to man."

- Robert Green Ingersoll

Mitch

[VideoFred]

As long as they don't force us to believe what they believe we should leave them alone

Ah, there's a problem. They sincerely want to force others to believe what they do, and are doing everything they can to make it happen.

OK, I do not like fanatics either. And we must definitely keep an eye on them...(and other even more dangerous fanatics) To protect our freedom.

The real terrible thing with religious fanatics is the fact many people are linking them with God, while God has nothing to do with them.

Many people stop believing in God because of these fanatic nitwits.
It's perfect possible to believe in God -on your own- without all this fanatic nonsense.

Fred.

[BolexPlusX]

I basically agree with what you are saying, but I think "fanatic" is a little strong. The Yalies are just quietly running a business in a way that reflects their principles. No stolen aircraft, no inquisitions, no witch trials like real fanatics.

B&H Photo in NYC is run by Orthodox Jews. I'd like to be able to order from their site on Saturday, but it is closed. They are not fanatics either, and they are not imposing their religion on me, simply asking to be allowed to observe their faith in peace. If I expect freedom, I have to be willing to allow them the same.

I don't think Yale is trying to impose their religion on anybody else regardless, they don't even mention it. They are simply limiting themselves to a set of moral codes and asking other people allow them to do so. Whether these codes arise from religion, or politics or personal meditation or whatever else is their concern. Expecting them to step outside these principals in business life is basically asking them to become hypocrites for the dollar from their perspective. I think moral principals are too much missing from business in general, I've watched a great deal of people shafting each other day to day for years, and if they'd found a reason not to do it, I really wouldn't care where they got it from.

Oh, by the way, anybody who thinks they are completely wrong is still completely in their rights to boycott them and encourage others to do the same.

I won't be joining.

[VideoFred]

I don't think Yale is trying to impose their religion on anybody else regardless, they don't even mention it. They are simply limiting themselves to a set of moral codes and asking other people allow them to do so.

Well, if this is true then there is no problem at all.
Everyone is free to have religious or moral rules.

But then why boycot them? (not meaning you, Bolex)
Just leave them alone.

Fred.

[BolexPlusX]

"why boycott them, just leave them alone"

Exactly!

[MovieStuff]

That said, Roger is right. The problem is he's taking a short-sighted, simplistic view of a far-reaching, complex issue. No, Yale is not breaking the law, and yes, they are free to refuse to handle certain types of footage, but I don't think that's what has people responding here - I think it's what their choices are based on, their reasons, that *scare* people. Those reasons represent a mindset people have fought long and hard from which to free themselves.

Actually, my view is far more reaching that you might think and hardly simplistic. I agree that religious zealousness is a serious issue here in the U.S. and other parts of the world. But is Yale representative of a fanatical religious view or just a group wanting to stand by their principles? And who makes that decision? You? me? And what qualifies our decision? Simply because we couldn't get what we wanted in the way of post services for our film or video project? I think this is far more complex than that.

If Yale does represent such an extreme belief system, then boycotting them is obviously pointless because they would rather go out of business than violate their principles. Also, a boycott would only serve to validate their own feelings of "us against them", which is what drives and unites most religious fanatics. But if Yale is merely trying to stand by a set of principles that you or I do not share, why should they be punished for that by calling on film makers that have otherwise "acceptable" footage to join a boycott against Yale? Just use them when it is appropriate and not when it isn't. Following such a self-imposed guideline isn't "bowing to their religious beliefs" but, rather, extending them the same courtesy that you would want when running your own business: The right to choose what projects you are involved in.

Also, remember this country was founded on religious freedom. I'm not that religious, myself, but I can assure you that the fundamental religious principles that guided our founding fathers would seem absolutely fanatical by today's more relaxed standards. So how do we decide what is right or wrong? By who will process and transfer our particular film? The answer is by looking at the law because the law is what protects the right to choose based on personal preference... for all of us.

I agree that open dialog about this problem is a good thing. But setting a precedent where you destroy the rights of others to choose as a pretext to dealing with what you or I view as religious fanatics is a very, very dangerous road to travel down. I can guarantee you that religious fanatics will use that precedent later on to try and force their own agenda by then limiting your right to choose.

THAT is the long term problem. Not who will process my naked pictures.

Roger