Good Friday just got better!

Gob · Post by **Gob** » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:48 pm

Tesco has apologised for any offence from a beer advertisement that claimed "Good Friday just got better".

The ad ran in some newspapers to promote "great offers on beer and cider" in the run-up to Easter.

The supermarket said it would not run the ad again after it attracted criticism from some religious figures.

Vicar and broadcaster, the Reverend Richard Coles, said the advert was "extraordinarily and unnecessarily ignorant".

Good Friday is when Christians commemorate the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Some choose to mark the day by fasting, which can include abstaining from eating meat or drinking alcohol.

There is some dispute about why it is called "good", with some suggesting the day is "good" in that it is holy, and others that the phrase is a corruption of "God's Friday".

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:55 pm

"extraordinarily and unnecessarily ignorant".

I'd say that pretty well sums it up...

RayThom · Post by **RayThom** » Fri Apr 14, 2017 4:52 am

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Fri Apr 14, 2017 7:02 am

I'd say a few beers or ciders is just the thing to accompany the crown of thorns, lashings and crucifixion. Forcing that on a sober soul would be just too cruel!

Big RR · Post by **Big RR** » Fri Apr 14, 2017 1:04 pm

And Easter morning you'd need really strong coffee to help you rise after a three day nap?

Maybe that's Tesco's next promotion?

RayThom · Post by **RayThom** » Fri Apr 14, 2017 1:27 pm

Hey, don't kill the messenger. Besides, this image is of the "western" Jesus that never existed.

HAPPY EASTER

Big RR · Post by **Big RR** » Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:15 pm

And while the second image probably looks a lot more like a Jewish man of the time, it is no more a picture of jesus than the fake one; they really knew how long his hair and beard were? Face it, there were no pictures or painting so him from the time and the shroud of Turin is not genuine. Unless they find that handkerchief his face was wiped with that supposedly has his image (veil of veronica--I think it disappeared in the 1500s), I guess we'll never know what he looked like.

RayThom · Post by **RayThom** » Fri Apr 14, 2017 6:42 pm

Big RR wrote:... And while the second image probably looks a lot more like a Jewish man of the time, it is no more a picture of jesus than the fake one; they really knew how long his hair and beard were? Face it, there were no pictures or painting so him from the time and the shroud of Turin is not genuine. Unless they find that handkerchief his face was wiped with that supposedly has his image (veil of veronica--I think it disappeared in the 1500s), I guess we'll never know what he looked like.

And that's why they call belief in him "faith." It's powerful voodoo. Too bad we'll never know who was right.

Guinevere · Post by **Guinevere** » Sat Apr 15, 2017 1:36 am

Lord Jim wrote:
"extraordinarily and unnecessarily ignorant".
I'd say that pretty well sums it up...

It's every bit as ridiculous as someone getting their panties in a twirl about an Apache helicopter.

RayThom · Post by **RayThom** » Sat Apr 15, 2017 2:46 am

Guinevere wrote:
Lord Jim wrote:
"extraordinarily and unnecessarily ignorant".
I'd say that pretty well sums it up...
It's every bit as ridiculous as someone getting their panties in a twirl about an Apache helicopter.

And if Easter can't get any more ridiculous it falls on April Fools Day next year. The last time this happened was in 1956. I can hardly wait.

Easter + April Fools = 1 fucked up 69th birthday. I can hardly contain myself.

Knock, knock! Who's there? Jesus. Jesus who? Jesus Christ it's getting stuffy in here -- roll back this stone for me.

rubato · Post by **rubato** » Sun Apr 16, 2017 7:12 pm

BoSoxGal wrote:I'd say a few beers or ciders is just the thing to accompany the crown of thorns, lashings and crucifixion. Forcing that on a sober soul would be just too cruel!

A sale on vinegar would be more fitting.

yrs,
rubato

ex-khobar Andy · Post by **ex-khobar Andy** » Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:08 pm

Tesco (for those of you living on the western edge of the pond) is the world's largest wine retailer, as the biggest supermarket chain in the UK where it is legal (unlike much of the US) to sell wine alongside food. Tesco was started by one Jack Cohen back in the 1930s. Jack Cohen retired to Brighton where I went to University, and my vacation job was working in a wine merchant there. This was while the law still required alcohol sales to be separate from food sales. I held that job for three years, and learned a great deal about Champagne and the finer burgundies from my manager who missed no opportunity to educate his staff. And one of my customers whom I saw every week was Jack Cohen. So I used to sell wine to the guy who founded the largest wine retailer on the planet. Thought you'd like to know. Cheers.

Bicycle Bill · Post by **Bicycle Bill** » Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:14 pm

What came after the Last Supper?

Why, THE LAST PANCAKE BREAKFAST, of course!

-"BB"-

Gob · Post by **Gob** » Sun Apr 16, 2017 11:45 pm

ex-khobar Andy wrote:Tesco (for those of you living on the western edge of the pond) is the world's largest wine retailer, as the biggest supermarket chain in the UK where it is legal (unlike much of the US) to sell wine alongside food.

Run that by me again? Why would your supermarkets not sell wine and food in the same place?

Econoline · Post by **Econoline** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:55 am

A lot of them do, some don't. I think it has to do with individual states' or counties' business licensing requirements. (I guess there are even a few states which have their own state-run liquor stores and don't allow any other stores to sell alcohol.)

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:06 am

Yup, some states in the USA sell wine only in separate 'package' stores, others allow it in groceries:

Gob · Post by **Gob** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:08 am

Ok, but what, if any, is the reasoning behind having them separate?

Crackpot · Post by **Crackpot** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:38 am

I don't know ask Canada (though they do seem to be loosening up on that recently.

ex-khobar Andy · Post by **ex-khobar Andy** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:03 am

Gob:

Ok, but what, if any, is the reasoning behind having them separate?

I assume it is nanny-reasoning - ten years ago when I lived in NY the supermarkets were allowed to sell beer but not before noon (IIRC) on a Sunday because you were supposed to be in church. No great inconvenience once you knew the rules and stocked up accordingly, but evidence that even in the world's freest country (!!!) there are assholes in authority who won't trust people to make their own decisions. In Kentucky supermarkets sold wine only in separate attached stores; but here in Missouri it's all one store. Daft; but as someone said a post or two earlier, there is a patchwork of local regulations. In New Hampshire, at least the last time I was there 10 years or so ago, the only liquor (spirit) stores are run by the state; and I think in Utah beer and wine are only available from the state. I don't know if this is common elsewhere, but here in MO I can buy a pint or a glass or wine and wander around the supermarket drinking it while I select toilet paper.

Bicycle Bill · Post by **Bicycle Bill** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:38 am

It actually goes back to the Temperance League and the 18th Amendment. Once the 21st Amendment — which repealed the 18th — was passed, the prohibitionists refused to give up without a fight, ramming through laws in many states whereby the only places where one could purchase intoxicating spirits, wine, or beer were state-licensed liquor stores, or giving towns and/or counties the determination of whether to allow liquor sales or to declare themselves "dry" (in fact, Lynchburg TN, home of the Jack Daniels distillery, is located in one such county!)

As time went by this led to a Byzantine set of laws and rulings which, among other things, resulted in two types of beer (3.2 beer and 'strong' beer) being marketed, Sunday "blue laws" in which establishments could not sell liquor by the drink unless the sale of alcohol represented less than 50% of total revenue, and 'bottle clubs' where you brought your own bottle which was kept locked up behind the bar for you; when you came in the bartender unlocked your bottle and you then bought a 'set-up' (the glass, ice, and mix) on a per-drink basis from the bartender.

Little by little these laws have been repealed or just plain ignored to the point that the few places that still have them are viewed with curiosity or amazement.

-"BB"-

Plan B Forum