Would you eat in or take out food from a restaurant that funded anti-Muslim hate groups - say, supporting groups which advocated burning down American mosques, with or without people inside them? Would you patronize a business that gave a couple of million dollars to a group like that, openly - and was PROUD of doing so?
Would you want to eat at a restaurant where the owner and founder routinely made statements that were derogatory to Hispanics, calling them terms like wet backs or spics? What if the owner asserted that countries south of our southern border, from Mexico onwards, people should be exterminated? Would you eat there or want them open and making more money to fund that hatred in YOUR neighborhood - or would you prefer a different business that made more healthy and constructive philanthropic choices?
How about if the owner of a proposed new restaurant was anti-Semitic instead of an Islamophobe - how would you feel if that owner gave money to organizations that funded white supremacist groups that staged public rallies claiming that Jews were dirty, and were responsible for killing Jesus, or were part of some secret plot to control the world's banks / gold supply/ oil supply/ water supply / or media? Would you want them welcomed by your city council when they applied for a business permit?
How about a business that was anti-asian, that referred to Asian Americans as 'gooks' or 'chinks' or 'slanty-eyed sloping headed morons'? Would that be ok? Or maybe they were anti-disabled, and felt that anyone born that way should be sterilized so they didn't reproduce -- and they gave a lot of money to eugenics-oriented pseudo-science promoting groups?
If you said NO to one or more of these hypothetical examples, you wouldn't want such a business or it's owner invested in an enterprise on one of your neighborhood street corners...........then how is it different from a mayor or a council person from objecting to Chick-Fail-hey!?
NO, not for supporting marriage inequality; they should be able to believe whatever religious nonsense, intolerant or otherwise if they wish. But here is a list of those organizations and the harm those organizations do, and the hate statements they make that are anti-gay, that received money from Chick-Fail-Hey!.
From Equality Matters, looking at documentation of actual hate groups funded by Chick-fail-hey!:
WinShape Gave Over $1.9 Million To Anti-Gay Groups. In 2010, WinShape donated $1,974,380 to a number of anti-gay groups:
Click here to learn more about WinShape’s history of anti-gay donations
The whole article is too long to repost here, so I'll provide some excerpts that identify the problem areas with Chick-Failure-hey! donations:
What is wrong with 'Exodus International'? In the past, Exodus International has engaged in torture of gays, including but by no means limited to strapping electrodes to male genitals, and then trying to shock them 'out of being gay'. ZAP!
from the article:
I can't; companies that did things like that are usually NOT considered good corporate citizens or desirable members of communities.
THAT kind of corporate donation and corporate advocacy is why cities have rejected Chick-Fail-hey!, not their embracing Christianity, albeit a very toxic religious version of it.
Here's another of the MANY anti-gay causes and organizations that Chick-FAIL-hey supports in terms of advocacy and financially:
Keep in mind - we're talking about donations in mulit-MILLION dollar amounts, not chump change. That is a serious amount of support for hate groups, junk hate science, contributing to teen suicide and genital electro-shock.
Is it really a good civic investment in more unhealthy fast food and a few part time minimum wage jobs -- or is it better use of the space and the community investment to get a GOOD business in the location? I say the latter, unless you're looking to increase the number of dead teens in YOUR town.
I'll venture further - if your town has any programming to prevent teen suicide, you'd probably end up paying out more than what you'd make in tax revenue.
Would you want to eat at a restaurant where the owner and founder routinely made statements that were derogatory to Hispanics, calling them terms like wet backs or spics? What if the owner asserted that countries south of our southern border, from Mexico onwards, people should be exterminated? Would you eat there or want them open and making more money to fund that hatred in YOUR neighborhood - or would you prefer a different business that made more healthy and constructive philanthropic choices?
How about if the owner of a proposed new restaurant was anti-Semitic instead of an Islamophobe - how would you feel if that owner gave money to organizations that funded white supremacist groups that staged public rallies claiming that Jews were dirty, and were responsible for killing Jesus, or were part of some secret plot to control the world's banks / gold supply/ oil supply/ water supply / or media? Would you want them welcomed by your city council when they applied for a business permit?
How about a business that was anti-asian, that referred to Asian Americans as 'gooks' or 'chinks' or 'slanty-eyed sloping headed morons'? Would that be ok? Or maybe they were anti-disabled, and felt that anyone born that way should be sterilized so they didn't reproduce -- and they gave a lot of money to eugenics-oriented pseudo-science promoting groups?
If you said NO to one or more of these hypothetical examples, you wouldn't want such a business or it's owner invested in an enterprise on one of your neighborhood street corners...........then how is it different from a mayor or a council person from objecting to Chick-Fail-hey!?
NO, not for supporting marriage inequality; they should be able to believe whatever religious nonsense, intolerant or otherwise if they wish. But here is a list of those organizations and the harm those organizations do, and the hate statements they make that are anti-gay, that received money from Chick-Fail-Hey!.
From Equality Matters, looking at documentation of actual hate groups funded by Chick-fail-hey!:
Chick-Fil-A Donated Nearly $2 Million To Anti-Gay Groups In 2010
July 02, 2012 9:26 am ET
In early 2011, Chick-fil-A came under fire for its donations and political ties to a number of anti-gay groups. Though Chick-fil-A continues to deny supporting an anti-gay agenda, the company has donated over $3 million to organizations like the Family Research Council and Exodus International between 2003 and 2009. And in 2010 alone, Chick-fil-A donated over $1.9 million to anti-gay causes, more than any other year for which public records are available.
Chick-Fil-A's Charitable Arm Gave Nearly $2 Million To Anti-Gay Groups In 2010
WinShape Is Chick-Fil-A's Charitable Arm. The WinShape Foundation is Chick-fil-A's charitable arm, created by Chick-fil-A founder and chairman S. Truett Cathy in 1984. WinShape has received a substantial amount of funding from Chick-fil-A: in 2010 alone, WinShape received $8,067,161 from Chick-fil-A Inc. [WinShape 2010, Publicly Available IRS 990 Form via Foundation Center, accessed 6/27/12]WinShape Gave Over $1.9 Million To Anti-Gay Groups. In 2010, WinShape donated $1,974,380 to a number of anti-gay groups:
- Marriage & Family Foundation: $1,188,380
- Fellowship Of Christian Athletes: $480,000
- National Christian Foundation: $247,500
- New Mexico Christian Foundation: $54,000
- Exodus International: $1,000
- Family Research Council: $1,000
- Georgia Family Council: $2,500
Click here to learn more about WinShape’s history of anti-gay donations
The whole article is too long to repost here, so I'll provide some excerpts that identify the problem areas with Chick-Failure-hey! donations:
EXODUS INTERNATIONAL
Exodus International Promotes “Ex-Gay” Therapy. Exodus International is a major promoter of “ex-gay” therapy, the practice of trying to change a person’s sexual orientation from gay to straight. The organization refers to being LGBT as “perverse” and a form of “sexual brokenness.” [Truth Wins Out, accessed 6/27/12]What is wrong with 'Exodus International'? In the past, Exodus International has engaged in torture of gays, including but by no means limited to strapping electrodes to male genitals, and then trying to shock them 'out of being gay'. ZAP!
from the article:
I first learned about Exodus International when doing some preliminary reporting on reparative therapy. Also known as conversion or reorientation therapy, reparative therapy has been rejected by the American Psychological Association and every other major professional medical organization in the United States. Considered harmful and damaging by mainstream scientific organizations, reparative therapy is a set of practices built around the assumption that homosexuality is a mental disorder that can be fixed. Using that as a starting point, reparative therapists use masturbatory reconditioning; social skills training; prayer groups and even aversive treatments, such as the application of electric shock to the genitals, in an attempt to turn gay men and women straight.Chick-fail-HEY! also contributed to Exodus International's iphone app (subsequently removed after very successful petitions against it) that was supposed to force gay kids into becoming heterosexual, an app that was withdrawn because of it's links to gay teen SUICIDES:
Truth Wins Out claims that the new iPhone app "is the latest move in Exodus' dangerous new strategy of targeting youth," in the petition for removal. "In light of the recent wave of LGBT youth suicides," it argues, "this tactic is particularly galling as it creates, legitimizes, and fuels the ostracism of LGBT youth by their families."Can you think of any other group where it would be acceptable to administer junk psychology treatments involving elctrical shocks to men and women's genitals -- treatment linked to serious psychological damage and death? Or any company that would receive municipal approval that was linked to actively funding and contributing to iphone apps with strong causal links to teen suicides?
I can't; companies that did things like that are usually NOT considered good corporate citizens or desirable members of communities.
THAT kind of corporate donation and corporate advocacy is why cities have rejected Chick-Fail-hey!, not their embracing Christianity, albeit a very toxic religious version of it.
Here's another of the MANY anti-gay causes and organizations that Chick-FAIL-hey supports in terms of advocacy and financially:
FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL
Family Research Council Is Deed As An Anti-Gay Hate Group By the SPLC.
The Family Research Council has been labeled a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for its propagation of known falsehoodscommunity. For example, president Tony Perkins has a long history of false and inflammatory attacks, such as claiming that pedophilia is a "homosexual problem." [Washington Times, 11/24/10; SPLC, accessed 6/27/12]
WinShape Donated $1,000 To Family Research Council.
WinShape donated $1,000 to the Family Research Council in 2010. [Winshape 2010 Publicly Available IRS 990 Form via Foundation Center, accessed 6/27/12]If you aren't willing to support falsely claiming Jews are inherently pedophiles (or, as was the case repeatedly at intervals in Europe, baby murderers) or Blacks are innately pedophiles, or disabled people are usually pedophiles, then WHY? Why would it be ok with anyone to accept THIS lie about same-sex attracted people? Those things are the kinds of false 'hate speech' statements you would expect to find from one of the other groups identified as a hate group by the SPLC - like the KKK or other white supremacist groups. Do you want any of THEM in your community closely linked to a restaurant or other business? NO? So.......then the mayors and city councils aren't so very far off, are they -- not for the marriage discrimination position, bad as that is, but for the anti-gay HATE funding.
Keep in mind - we're talking about donations in mulit-MILLION dollar amounts, not chump change. That is a serious amount of support for hate groups, junk hate science, contributing to teen suicide and genital electro-shock.
Is it really a good civic investment in more unhealthy fast food and a few part time minimum wage jobs -- or is it better use of the space and the community investment to get a GOOD business in the location? I say the latter, unless you're looking to increase the number of dead teens in YOUR town.
I'll venture further - if your town has any programming to prevent teen suicide, you'd probably end up paying out more than what you'd make in tax revenue.
If a corporation gives money to a charity that funds non-profits organizations, then the corporation is to blame for everything the non-profits do and say, right?
ReplyDeleteDoes that principle apply to individuals, too? For example, if a teacher paid union dues that went to a political action committee that handed out cigarettes to bribe poor people to vote for Democrats in, say, Milwaukee, would the teacher be a wicked person?
.
If a corporate donor, directed by one or two individuals, supports and endorses the activity of a hate group, gives their approval to that hate group, and continues funding them, knowing what they are doing - like electrical shock to people's genitals, or like the app linked to teen suicide --and when that is pretty much ALL that the non-profit does, then YES, so long as they indicate they support those actions - YES they are accountable.
ReplyDeleteIt's not like giving money to the United Way where a corporation might disagree with one non-profit, but support most.
This is a case where the corporation specifically states they support what these organizations do -- ALL of these things. They don't ONLY give to this group - they give to other groups LIKE it, not groups which are different. The consistent characteristic is anti-gay.
What would YOU consider anti-gay?
Got proof about handing out cigarettes as a bribe to vote Doakes? You DO know right, that for example in MN, despite all those urban myths, that the only convictions for voter fraud were related to votes for McCain and for Coleman right?
I'd hate for you to continue to operate under those fact free right wing notions about voter fraud.
If the teacher and the union stated, publicly, they favored bribing people - poor or otherwise - they would be bad people who were committing crimes.
Which is pretty much what Chick-fail-hey did, paid for an organization to torture people by applying psychologically and physically damaging faux therapy.
Do you condone gential shock or anti-gay groups Joe?
For example, if a teacher paid union dues that went to a political action committee that handed out cigarettes to bribe poor people to vote for Democrats in, say, Milwaukee, would the teacher be a wicked person?
ReplyDeleteSo, Joe, does that mean you believe Congressman Paul Ryan and GOP presidential candidate Mitts on R-money are evil for handing out meals as bribes to vote on election day this past April in Waukesha WI? Bribing voters - you know, that stuff the right is always accusing Democrats of doing - is a felony. We will be waiting eagerly for the next Constitutional Amendment from the right to stop the left from doing what it is the right does and then projects onto Democrats.
http://fox6now.com/2012/04/04/waukesha-co-investigating-sub-sandwich-situation/
the law defines a bribe as items having more than $1 in value; most subss cost more than that, don't you agree?
Next time they bribe voters, I'm betting Mitts on R-money and Paul -redistribute money up to the rich even faster - Ryan will hand out free Chick - Fail-Heys instead.
Proof? Sort of. WISN-12, a television station in Milwaukee, reported that Democrat activist Connie Milstein was fined $5,000 for handing out cigarettes to homeless people to vote for Al Gore. I concede her offense is like the Tony Sutton thing here - couldn't get enough evidence to prove a criminal case so they went wih a civil fine, instead. But she paid the fine so that's a good clue she likely did the deed, don't you think?
ReplyDelete.
Target gave six figures to Tom Emmer. Gays thought Emmer was wicked because he held the same opinion on gay marriage as Barak Obama.
ReplyDeleteDo you shop at Target? Doesn't that mean you support Emmer? Why are you anti-gay? Why are you so hateful?
If blame attaches all the way up the chain, then you're as wicked as everybody else. I think that's a silly way to look at the world.
.
I haven't set foot in a target since they gave the six figures to Emmer.
ReplyDeleteObama no longer holds the same opinion as Emmer, and they were never as similar as you suggest.
There is no 'chain' with the Chick-Fail-Hey folks and the groups they fund; it is direct, and the shared opinions are explicit, not guilt by association.
You don't seem to look at information very carefully Joe, tsk tsk. These are important distinctions.
I seem to recall that the Milstein situation was one where they could not prove that there was an offer of cigarettes in exchange for voting.
ReplyDeleteNO, actually; I don't think that proves anything about a bribe to vote. It doesn't appear it was a bribe at all in exchange for a vote, just a nice gesture to poor people. They didn't charge her with anything other than a technical violation because there was never, ever, from anyone, including the tv crew, a claim that it was payment for voting. This was an affluent woman who didn't see the cost of a carton of cigarettes as expensive, and who smoked herself, apparently so was sympathetic. Have you never seen people bum cigarettes before?
But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that you would try to twist that into something more sinister; that is the way it was reported in the fact-averse right wing media. I don't get the impression you multi-source much. I can't find any record of the supposed film that shows her giving out ten packs, but even if it was more than one, if after giving a pack to one man, the other people asked for a pack as well, that still doesn't make the link that it was a bribe to vote.
The case of Ryan and Mitts on R-money is clearly quite different; the value is greater, it is not a one-off, and it is explicitly a bribe to vote, as their own words show on video.
As to the events relating to Connie Milstein:
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2001-05-05/news/18178846_1_ballots-absentee-constance-milstein
"She and other activists drove a van filled with men from the Milwaukee Rescue Mission to City Hall to fill out absentee ballots.
Metz said that as Milstein sat in the van smoking, a man who had filled out an absentee ballot asked her for a pack.
"[Milstein] said to somebody, 'Go across the street and get a carton of cigarettes,' " Metz said."
By the way Joe -- WHERE does the teachers union make a donation to Connie Milstein that was used for cigarettes?
ReplyDeleteIt appears to be quite clearly a case of her using her own money, not teacher's union money, not Super Pac money, not campaign contributions of any kind.
You got anything that verifiably says different?
If not --- then you don't have a comparison to the ChickFail owners giving money to gay torturers and suicide causers to do their viciousness.
Joe - outline for me again your comparison please.
ReplyDeleteWe have Chick-Failing setting up a non-profit distributor of their anti-gay cash, overtly and actively supporting the goals AND METHODS of organizations that torture gays, are hateful to gays, and contribute actively to psychological harm including suicides of gays, to the tune of millions.
I don't see how that was supposed to be a comparison to teachers unions donating to a candidate, where another supporter of the same campaign, but not in any way directly connected to the teachers union OR their money, is encouraging voters to vote, and happens to pop for $30 worth of cigarettes out of her personal funds. I know cigarettes are an unhealthy habit, but it doesn't seem to have anything like the intention of electroshock to someone's genitalia, or an app that tells someone they are such an abomination and so undeseerving of love or acceptance, and that their families and friends should cut them out of their lives for who they are, that people - especially teenage kids -- commit suicide.
There is a lack of connection in your example, there is a lack of comparable institutions, there is a total lack of comparison in amounts, and of course there is a one-off, versus donations over a period of years.
So......except for being nothing alike......your point is what, again?