10 Companies That Hate Gays, page 2

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 03:47 AM

link

reply to post by Averysmallfoxx

Maybe if they don't try and force their way of life on to us they may get some sympathy from the fence sitters.

Prop 8 was put to a vote and they lost. Instead of acting civil and try and show that they just want to be recognized and be a full part of society they riot, storm churches during services and make out on the altar and they try and get the word marriage taken out of society.

Averysmallfoxx

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 03:52 AM

link

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Most of those companies are on the list for not having Domestic Partnership benefits........

Gays know that not only Gays can be domestic partners? .. Many, many many straights enter partnerships for a variety of reasons, but avoid the commitment and legality of Marriage.

The list is a bunch of BS if you ask me.

I think this is skirting the issue, while straight domestic partners know they are not entitled the same rights and choose such limitations, gay couples do not have a choice and are given no other option in so far as marriage is concerned. Some of these listed companies contribute to lobbying against gay rights as well seems a bit more than just saying "all domestic partnerships" and instead they choose not to specifically point out who they are deciding to discriminate against....a bit sketchy as so far as intent is concerned.

Averysmallfoxx

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 03:58 AM

link

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Averysmallfoxx

Maybe if they don't try and force their way of life on to us they may get some sympathy from the fence sitters.

Prop 8 was put to a vote and they lost. Instead of acting civil and try and show that they just want to be recognized and be a full part of society they riot, storm churches during services and make out on the altar and they try and get the word marriage taken out of society.

Prop 8 is and was unconstitutional and maybe some people acted in the way you specify but not all do and stereotyping all who live the gay lifestyle in such a manor as to say all do that or should be given grief for those who did is IGNORANT. It would be equivalent to saying the blacks were wrong to riot and protest and whatever else because of the oppression they endured in the earlier years of our country. Again no one says you HAVE to like it, just that you need to be tolerant.That companies should represent tolerance in their treatment of employees of all walks of life.

jd140

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 04:05 AM

link

reply to post by Averysmallfoxx

No I am not ignorant.

Some did do this, there is no might about it. While they all did not do it, I have not heard any from their community condemn these acts.

You tell me I have to be tolerant and I am. I am also tolerant of the fact that these companies can donate their money to whoever they want. It is theirs to do with what they please.

I want them to have the same toleration that I have and not to force companies to be sympathetic with them by boycotting them.

Why must I be tolerant and they don't?

Averysmallfoxx

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 04:40 AM

link

reply to post by jd140

You aren't being oppressed,how are they forcing their lifestyle on you? Your comments suggest your being forcibly made to stomache watching and living the gay lifestyle but thats you exaggerating with a amazingly dramatic degree. You didn't choose to be straight you just are, just like you didn't choose what race you wanted to be, they did not either, they just are and you do have to accept that its going to be there whether you like it or not, that you cant just go around discriminating against them forever. It's wrong and if the coin was flipped you wouldn't be so staunch in your belief that the discrimination is acceptable. We are all to be treated with dignity and respect and equally, like I said, this is the same as saying someone who is black cannot have the same benefits as someone who is white, its wrong and that example is a proven and reproven model of unacceptable discrimination. The homosexual example is the same its just been modified slightly and it still falls under the category of minority discrimination. You just choose to deny its legitimacy. No one will make you believe anything you dont want to but facts are facts. If one person is treated better than another for reasons outside their ability to control such as race,gender,sexual orientation,or religious belief it IS discrimination whether you believe it to be or not.

jd140

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 04:45 AM

link

reply to post by Averysmallfoxx

Said something you didn't like I see.

You did not respond to anything I said in that post. Is it because you don't have a good arguement against it?

Slow your role, cool down and give a nice decent response to my last post.

czacza1

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 06:17 AM

link

hate? come on. how on hell the companies do have any kind of feelings toward gays? in the work I do not ask or show any intrest about the sexual life of my workers. it is not my bussiness unless they will start with it.

and yes, if homosexual (or heterosexual) employee is going to make a prohomosexual (proheterosexual) propaganda in the work I will fire him. it is not a place to talk about it.

so why gay people has a problem in work? maybe they are trying to focus on the sexual issues in workhours instead of doing their job properly?

Rockpuck

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 06:18 AM

link

reply to post by Averysmallfoxx

Quite agree, but honestly I don't think these companies are doing this specifically against gays (maybe the one's where ceo's and owners donate to anti gay causes) but the rest are following normal business practices -- which is not all companies provide Partnership benefits. I have never worked for a company that offered partner benefits actually.

The reason being..

Take Mr. Smith, he just got a nice job with excellent benefits. Mr. Smith has a friend, jan, who has chronic respiratory problems, is a cancer survivor, diabetes and various other issues. Well Mr. Smith feels bad for her so they get a domestic partnership and Jan now has excellent health care -- however it causes all of the employees at the companies to see an increase in premiums.

The point being:

Take gay issues up with states, not with companies. Your crucifying the wrong entities.

ho chi minh

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 06:41 AM

link

what the hell is a gay dollar?
why do some members of the gay community insist on using this sort of language
stop putting your sexual orientation on things
can't you just accept that we are all equal and stop promoting this gay victim crap.

slicobacon

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 08:37 AM

link

Prop 8 is and was unconstitutional and maybe some people acted in the way you specify but not all do and stereotyping all who live the gay lifestyle in such a manor as to say all do that or should be given grief for those who did is IGNORANT.

Maybe I'm missing something. How is Prop 8 Unconstitutional? I've read the Constitution several times and see nothing about homosexuality.

Your reaching- and grasping............

Homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle, just like being a punk rocker, racist or freemason.

It can not be compared to one's racial identity or religion.

People are and should be judged on their behavior and moral decisions they make.

awake_awoke

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link

Half of them are actually homophobic-
and the other half are just so greedy that they don't want to pay benefits for domestic partnerships because every penny counts!!!!!

And they keep trying to convince you that employers should handle the health insurance issue......

awake_awoke

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link

Originally posted by jd140

Maybe if they don't try and force their way of life on to us they may get some sympathy from the fence sitters.

Prop 8 was put to a vote and they lost. Instead of acting civil and try and show that they just want to be recognized and be a full part of society they riot, storm churches during services and make out on the altar and they try and get the word marriage taken out of society.

This is the problem with our country.

Look at ATS...there are so many upside down flag waving assault weapon gathering NWO conspiracy loving --anything but Ron Paul hating folks on here that FEEL THEY ARE BEING OPPRESSED IN REGARDS TO THEIR FREEDOM.

Look in the mirror.

Can you imagine what it feels like to be a second class citizen? To pay your taxes, more so than most on average, to a country that won't even let you live your life?

Trying to get the word marriage take out of society?
WHAT!

Marriage is much more than a word my friend.

Rockpuck

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link

reply to post by slicobacon

Your absolutely right, anyone who says Prop 8 or any other STATE proposals are 100% completely constitutional as far as the Federal Constitution is concerned (as for your own States constitution I have never read California's so I cannot say)

It would actually be unconstitutional for any National adoption of gay/anti gay legislation, as these are ethical matters that belong on State voting lists, not the Feds.

HereBy1

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link

Originally posted by rcwj75
Bottom line is this. Not everyone has to be accepting of GAYS...not people, not groups, not private businesses. When are GAY people going to understand that their lifestyle WILL NOT be accepted fully...EVER! Agree with it or not, why is it the gay community thinks they should be allowed to FORCE everyone to accept it...and if someone doesn't except it, they somehow have recourse? I don't get it.

I found this post to be offensive. You don't seem to recognize that these Bible heads are always trying to force religion on gays and become violent when not heard. So do NOT exclude them. That statement you made is so irellivent, because fact is when people aren't allowed to express their true nature, they will start to let people know exactly how they feel. Is self expression too much for you?

ghaleon12

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
1. Why is this in global meltdown? The fact that the freedom of these companies to NOT support a populist agenda because thet disagree with it is still being legally upheld is an example of one of the few Constitutional rights that isn't melting down. Private businesses equals them having the First amendment right to make their own decision on this topic, just as it means you have the right to not patronize their business over it.

2. This is every bit as ridiculous as the religious right boycotting and persecuting Disney because they made the choice to cover gay domestic partners a few years back. Same level of assininity, just from the oposite side of the coin.

But legally you couldn't deny benefits to black couples, asian couples ect. Black rights was a populist agenda at one point in time as well. It isn't a Constitutional right last time I checked to discriminate, affecting the live of normal people.

It really isn't asinine though in that it makes sense, if you want to persuade people money talks lol.

I'd hate for these boycotts to backfire in a way. I could see companies change to become more gay friendly just so they can make more of a profit while the people still holding on to their prejudices inwardly.

Originally posted by rcwj75
Bottom line is this. Not everyone has to be accepting of GAYS...not people, not groups, not private businesses. When are GAY people going to understand that their lifestyle WILL NOT be accepted fully...EVER! Agree with it or not, why is it the gay community thinks they should be allowed to FORCE everyone to accept it...and if someone doesn't except it, they somehow have recourse? I don't get it.

Sure you don't have to be accepting of anything on a personal level, just like you can choose to hate or like anything freely, races, sandwiches, cars ect. But that can't affect another person's quality of life, like if a partner is denied health benefits.

You don't have to accept it or like it, but that is irrespective of how gays should be treated.

It's sort of funny because hypothetically lets say there was a very rich, gay business man who had thousands of employees and he didn't give partner benefits to straight couples, but only gay couples (or in this example you could not even mention gay couples) Do you know how upset the straight people would be? They would be doing everything the gays are trying to do. Would the gays be right to say, "You shouldn't force your beliefs on me, blah blah blah". I doubt it. Each one of you that doesn't support gay rights would support it if the shoe was on the other foot, so where's the objectivity/ truth in that?

[edit on 22-3-2009 by ghaleon12]

RetinoidReceptor

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link

These companies, such as WalMart and Exxon, may fund anti gay activities but they also probably fund pro gay activities. They don't have feelings on social issues, as long as they can bring in more cash flow is the ONLY thing they care about to keep their shareholders happy. So if they can tell people in Mississippi that they support anti gay initiatives and tell people in South Florida that they support pro gay initiatives then it is all good.

Oldtimer2

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link

Sounds to me it's a load of crap started by gays,seems they are always trying to pin the blame on others,and they never let the truth get in the way of a good story,seems I've been to these supposed gay hating buisnesses and guess what they had gay people working there,get a freakin life

ghaleon12

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link

Originally posted by Oldtimer2
Sounds to me it's a load of crap started by gays,seems they are always trying to pin the blame on others,and they never let the truth get in the way of a good story,seems I've been to these supposed gay hating buisnesses and guess what they had gay people working there,get a freakin life

Yeah, because not having partner benefits is their fault? Employing gays isn't the problem. On a side note, I feel anyone that say to someone "get a life" is a moron. I suppose everyone that is working for human rights should just get a life.

As a society, we basically "can't" be racist, sexist, whatever. But we can be against gays, which I find funny. If someone on TV, or anywhere, says I hate blacks and women, people will hate them. Someone says something against gays, some hate that person and some will think of them as being a good Christian. If we are going to allow gay intolerance, we sure as heck better allow racism and sexism and everything else, at least that's fair.

[edit on 22-3-2009 by ghaleon12]

RetinoidReceptor

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link

Originally posted by ghaleon12

Originally posted by Oldtimer2
Sounds to me it's a load of crap started by gays,seems they are always trying to pin the blame on others,and they never let the truth get in the way of a good story,seems I've been to these supposed gay hating buisnesses and guess what they had gay people working there,get a freakin life

Yeah, because not having partner benefits is their fault? Employing gays isn't the problem. On a side note, I feel anyone that say to someone "get a life" is a moron. I suppose everyone that is working for human rights should just get a life.

It is okay to accept gay people's money in taxes and spending, but they cannot get married. But as long as WalMart hires gay people...well then that is good.

ravenshadow13

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link

I'm not surprised to see some companies on there (Wal-Mart, Dominos, Exxon). I think it is hateful to call this hate speech. Why would you fund a company that doesn't treat all its employees equally, or doesn't support them? I typically boycott those companies anyway for other reasons, but this adds a reason to my list.

Disgusting. There should be laws to prevent things like this. It's really discrimination, I mean, that's what it boils down to.

And discrimination is bull.

[edit on 3/22/2009 by ravenshadow13]