Walmart backing Gay/Lesbian movement

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Walmart backing Gay/Lesbian movement

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Well Monday is Gay and Lesbian Awareness Day on many campuses across america. You can't celebrate an angry white male who committed genocide against the native peoples and pillaging the land but you can celebrate gay and lesbian awareness. Now throw in some corporate sponsorship and you are all set.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

I read through the link bok shared, as well as a link from that webpage that appears to be a copy of the school's press / news release.

I found the following to be, well, funny in a strange sort of way...

Heterosexism. 12:40-1:30 p.m. Oct. 11, Student Union Barnwell Room. Presented by Don and Susan Curtis. The Curtises, a heterosexual couple, will talk about how to recognize heterosexism and how to deal with it.

What, pray tell, is heterosexism? If it is heterosexual lifestyle and preference, I'd like to know how difficult it really is to recognize that a guy likes girls and a girl likes guys... And, hmmm.... how do you deal with that travesty...

Actually, a "dictionary" definition of the term is "discrimination or prejudice by heterosexuals against homosexuals"... so, the logical conclusion would be there is a term "homosexism", which means the converse, or "discrimination or prejudice by homosexuals against heterosexuals"... Well, wrong the word does not exist, because we all know they would never stoop to that level to impugn, let alone, be biased against or (gasp) heterosexuals... they just want to be recognized for who they are and be at peace with the world and all mankind... you know, it all is just a great big Coca Cola commercial where everyone holds hands and sings that song about "teaching the world to sing in perfect harmony" and it is those hateful homophobes who are causing all the pain and hurt and contention and hate and anger.

Well, I didn't shop at Walmart anyway, but this gives me even less incentive to ever do so. But hey, it makes them money, just like Eisner turned much of Disney into a prostitot factory, so what is wrong with that... I wonder how much rolling in the grave Walt Disney has been doing to see the role model he envisioned in The Mouseketeers turn into the likes of 99% of the "stars" and "role models" the modern versions of them are today...

-- Edited by Cat Herder at 14:04, 2006-10-06

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Nice how they discussion has shifted from normalizing homosexuality to there's something wrong with heterosexuals. How the winds have shifted on this one.

If buttercups buzz'd after the bee,
If boats were on land, churches on sea,
If ponies rode men and if grass ate the cows,
And cats should be chased into holes by the mouse,
If the mamas sold their babies
To the gypsies for half a crown;
If summer were spring and the other way round,
Then all the world would be upside down.
(source: http://www.contemplator.com/england/worldtur.html )

Oh, for those of you in Idaho be sure to catch the youth dance associated with the GLBT week festivities! I'm sure it will be very entertaining!

-- Edited by salesortonscom at 14:30, 2006-10-06

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Sorry, but a dance that welcomes everyone 24-years and under is not a youth dance. :disgusted:

glumirk · Senior Member

This whole homosexuality thing is really getting out of hand. This is what I've been hearing about in my neck of the woods:

Shelton Opposes Gay Marriage Ban

It's enough to make a person sick to their stomach. I think the whole issue of "diversity" is a bit wrong. We are human beings! That's all there is to it. I think that Heavenly Father did a pretty good job of making every one of us completely different, there's no need to accentuate a sin by calling it "diversity".

Oh, and on top of that he wants to increase our diversity by fudging enrollment so that 1/4 of students are Hispanic? I know for a fact that if a school decided that they were going to raise their enrollment to be 25% caucasian males that there would be an uproar. I think it should be the same for Hispanics. Next thing I know I'll have to speak Spanish just to live in Arizona! Not that I don't think it's a beautiful language or that they are great people...I do think that. I just think that having race be an issue at all is bad and defeats the whole purpose of having a "diverse" university.

gag me.

Jeffery_LQ1W · Senior Member

There is a conflicting question involved here.

Morally speaking, it is wrong, no doubt about that. The question is where in the development of laws does the morality play? Laws are a reflection of the mores (and morality) of the people and hence their reflection is has to be tempered by the constitutional rights at hand. Is being gay constitutionally illegal? If it is not, then what actions should be allowed or disallowed?

Is it wrong or right for a business to pander to a special interest group in order to get their money? Walmart? Disney? What is the proper response?

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Jeffery_LQ1W wrote:

Is it wrong or right for a business to pander to a special interest group in order to get their money? ...What is the proper response?

If the money ain't a comin' my way, then it is jest plain d wrong...

Actually, I don't think they should be sellin' all them pand-ers to special interest groups. I heard thar ain't but a mess of them pand-ers left in the wild. Heard from my neighbors cousin twice removed, Bubba, that they taste like chicken!

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Politicians LOVE victim groups. Special interest groups are great, cuz they create a "voting base" which with a few fair words of sympathy can be counted on, again and again, to keep them in office, while they greedily enjoy the spoils of political power.

--Ray

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Oh, you make it sound so nasty... you best be careful, or no pand-er dinner fer you, son...

TitusTodd · Senior Member

I think corporations that sponser "diversity" events such as this are sadly mistaken that it will further their bottom line. Once they realize that, such sponsorships will end (or should).

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

TitusTodd wrote:

I think corporations that sponser "diversity" events such as this are sadly mistaken that it will further their bottom line. Once they realize that, such sponsorships will end (or should).

Well, it not only does not need to show a net gain to their bottom line, but they have to realize it is not going to benefit them come tax time... that they don't get to claim it as some sort of charitable giving. And they need to realize that they perhaps don't want that sort of "advertising" going on, tarnishing their image and brand name(s). Now, as to the latter, some huge entity like a Walmart is hardly ever going to worry about being a corporate sponser of something like this is going to hurt their image when they are already the scapegoat of nearly everyone for lots of different things... It is kind of like there was never a market or need for shopping on Sunday until stores decided to stay open and create that market and need.

arbilad · Head Chef

I honestly don't think that the bottom line is their motivation for sponsoring such events. I think that the persons controlling walmart simply have an agenda, and the muscle of walmart gives them a way to pursue it. After all, we know it's the nature of men to seek power. Massive wealth gives you a sort of power, but politics gives you even more. Once you have massive wealth, the natural man inclines you to push your political agenda to seek power.

TitusTodd · Senior Member

Wal-mart still has to answer to shareholders (though a lot of shares are held by the Walton family, many are not). They are suffering a little in the profit area as of late. There are limits to what larger shareholders will stomach.

The fact is, many large corporations are doing things - supporting lifestyles (through employee benefits, for example) and organizations that we probably would not support. They seem set to accomodate a wide variety of societal segments. It is almost as if they are looking in every corner, even some dark ones, to find a dollar. When you are dealing with a wide variety of shareholders and you are brown nosing politicians (either party - and depending on the industry), you end up with some "interesting" actions.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

Jeffery_LQ1W wrote:

There is a conflicting question involved here.

Morally speaking, it is wrong, no doubt about that. The question is where in the development of laws does the morality play? Laws are a reflection of the mores (and morality) of the people and hence their reflection is has to be tempered by the constitutional rights at hand. Is being gay constitutionally illegal? If it is not, then what actions should be allowed or disallowed?

Elder Oaks addressed that issue:

Law has at least two roles: one is to define and regulate the limits of acceptable behavior. The other is to teach principles for individuals to make individual choices. The law declares unacceptable some things that are simply not enforceable, and there’s no prosecutor who tries to enforce them. We refer to that as the teaching function of the law.

Excerpted from an interview where Elder Oaks explained the church's position on same-gender attraction and the marriage amendment. You can read the full text here: http://www.lds.org/newsroom/issues/answer/0,19491,6056-1-202-4-202,00.html

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

...but wicked lawmakers can use the law "to teach" the population in the same way we hope to use it... and that's the real danger of greater public acceptance of a very vocal minority that's got real moral problems...