“It is disappointing but not surprising that Starbucks wish to re-define marriage and believes that support for sodomy and homosexual marriage is a core value.”
That from “Right to Life”, a group that is usually protesting women’s rights but has now turned their attention to Starbucks and those dirty gays.
It may seem a rather strange move for an anti-abortion group to suddenly start caring about gay rights, but they do go hand in hand—they’re all the same right-wing, religious fundamentalists, and they see it as all part of the same liberal agenda.
So, why Starbucks?
In the U.S., the fight for marriage equality is slowly marching across the various states, and many large companies, from McDonald’s to Microsoft*, are declaring their support for the total equality that their constitution promised. Starbucks was one of the companies to join the growing list, and it was this statement that got the fundies’ proverbial knickers in a twist:
“Starbucks is proud to join other leading Northwest employers in support of Washington State legislation recognising marriage equality for same–sex couples. From our very earliest days, Starbucks have strived to create a company culture that put our people first and our company has a lengthy history of leading on and supporting policies that promote equality and inclusion.”
I know, shocking stuff. I’ll get the smelling salts.
Why would companies need to openly support LGBT rights? Often companies are accused (by pundits on both the right and the left) of being tokenistic for the sake of sales, that they’re using it as a shallow marketing ploy. But often companies go the other way, and avoid talk of minority rights for fear of upsetting the bigots who organise boycotts, like Right to Life or One Million Moms (who recently spectacularly failed to organise a boycott against JC Penney for hiring Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson).
But as Microsoft pointed out in a statement, marriage equality “would be good for our business and for the state’s economy.” By promoting a world where all their employees are able to life open and freely, they’re able to have workers who are happier, not just at work, but outside it too, and therefore are more productive.
Yes, it’s for the benefit of their bottom line, but that still makes things better for us. They’re not exploiting us, they’re recognising that our rights make things better for everyone.
Back to Right to Life:
“The family is at the centre of a culture of life, it is the foundation of a stable society. It is the family that brings forth children, future citizens who are essential for the continuance of society. The promotion of same sex marriage is an attack on the institution of marriage and on society itself. Right to Life supports the human rights of the homosexual members of our community, however there is no human right to homosexual marriage.
“… Those in the community who believe that marriage is exclusively for one man and one woman will be offended by the attack of Starbucks on the family. They are encouraged to boycott Starbucks Coffee shops and to take their business to coffee shops that support the family and who do not support sodomy and homosexual marriage.”
“The attack of Starbucks on the family.” That says it all.
I had originally written a spiel about “traditional marriage” being a relatively new concept, marriage as an institution failing and that they’ve found a scapegoat in the LGBT community, but that’s irrelevant. We already know that. And they won’t listen anyway.
They feel so entitled to this world that they view anything that isn’t them, as an attack on them. They don’t want to prohibit same-sex marriage or LGBT rights to protect children or society. They want to prohibit it because they think they are entitled to own it all themselves—and they want us to graciously thank them for the privilege of existing in their world in the first place, as if we’d just forget all the hate they spewed when we fought to simply make ourselves legal.
All the problems with the world have their own sources, and none of them come from same-sex marriage.
So, I shan’t be boycotting Starbucks, and I can’t imagine many people doing the same at the ridiculous call of dishonestly named Right to Life. Also, I can’t think of many cases of sodomy leading to abortion at all…
* I find it interesting to note, that both Microsoft and Apple, as well as the likes of Google, Hewlett-Packard and Dell, and many other computer companies, all openly support marriage equality. Right to Life are only calling for a boycott against Starbucks—I wonder if they used a PC or a Mac to write up their press release, or if the servers hosting it use any Oracle technology. If they want their boycott to be honest and consistent (two words you don’t usually find associated with such pro-hate groups) then they’re going to find themselves rather cut off. Even if they did it all on paper, they’d probably run into technology owned by Xerox.