Starbucks and God: Part Deux

I have to think that someone at Starbucks isn't thinking.

When I first discussed this, I cut Starbucks plenty of slack for issuing a cup with an anti-God message on it.

I spoke out in favor of free speech.
WorldNetDaily reports on another anti-God Starbucks cup:

...Ken Peck of Lakeland, Fla., has since purchased a coffee with another message he felt was a slam against his Christian faith, and snapped a photograph of it.



The message reads:

Heaven is totally overrated. It seems boring. Clouds, listening to people play the harp. It should be somewhere you can’t wait to go, like a luxury hotel. Maybe blue skies and soft music were enough to keep people in line in the 17th century, but Heaven has to step it up a bit. They're basically getting by because they only have to be better than Hell. -- Joel Stein, columnist for the Los Angeles Times.

If Joel Stein is dissatisfied with Heaven, he should secure himself a place in Hell for eternity, a place that wouldn't bore him. That would be nice. Whatever makes him happy.

I'm not backing off from supporting free speech, but I do question why Starbucks would want to stir up a hornet's nest.

It doesn't seem like a good marketing move. Offending customers isn't a way to improve business.

Starbucks claims the intention is "sparking conversation."

In the tradition of coffee houses everywhere, Starbucks has always supported a good, healthy discussion. To get people talking, “The Way I See It” is a collection of thoughts, opinions and expressions provided by notable figures that now appear on our widely shared cups.

OK.

Spark conversation.

Is there a cup that says men are intellectually superior to women?

Is there a cup that says at only ten weeks gestation a fetus can move her arms and legs?
Is there a cup that says Al Gore's global warming gibberish is hysterical idiocy?

Is there a cup that promotes institutionalized racism?

Is there a cup that decries the deeply engrained terrorist element in radical Islam?

Those cups would spark conversation.

Why not take this a step further?

Why not put images on the cups?

How about an image of an 11-week-old fetus sucking her thumb?

Here's another idea: An image of Mohammed.

Perhaps Starbucks would like to spark more than conversation.

With an image of Mohammed, Starbucks could spark weeks of riots around the world.

I'd like to know which statements would be considered too offensive to be printed on the cups.

What are the standards?

Someone at Starbucks is making those decisions. What sort of statements are off limits?

One thing is certain: The cups are sparking conversation.