Chuck Darrell, director of communications for Minnesota for Marriage, responds in the Star Tribune to a recent argument used to oppose marriage amendments:
In "The marriage amendment, from all angles" (Jan. 14), Marilyn Carlson Nelson, chairman of Carlson, a travel and hospitality company, argues that if Minnesota voters pass the Marriage Protection Amendment, talented gay employees will no longer want to work and live in our state.
This is an absurd argument, undercut by the experience of her own company, the trends of gay population in our state and plain old logic.
Carlson's premiere brand is the Radisson Hotels. Of the 108 Radisson locations in the United States, 70 of them -- fully 65 percent -- are located in states with a marriage protection amendment similar to that proposed in Minnesota.
Another Carlson brand is Country Inn & Suites. Of the states it has chosen to operate in, 67 percent have a marriage amendment in their constitution.
Sixty-four percent of all their 40 Country Inn & Suites properties are in states with a marriage amendment. And 86 percent of their Park Inn by Radisson properties are located in states with a marriage amendment.
Obviously, Carlson is thriving in states with marriage amendments. There is no reason to conclude they would not continue to thrive in Minnesota.
18 Comments
Great job, Mr. Darrell. The fact that Ms. Nelson would lie so blatantly does not reflect well on her integrity as a person. Many SSM supporters seem to feel quite comfortable spouting off any verbiage that will support their cause, even when they know it's untrue. Lies are a poor foundation for a movement.
It appears that Ms. Nelson was being prophetic because Carlson was just added to my families "do not patronize" list.
Ms. Nelson is pushing a sort of reverse-remake of the "SSM will result in a boon to the economy" argument. Mr. Darrell did an excellent job correcting the falsehoods.
Barb - Many Marriage equality deniers seem to feel quite comfortable spouting off any verbiage that will support their cause, even when they know it's untrue. Lies are a poor foundation for a movement. As some one who reads the blogs here regularly I know this all too well.
No one on the right or the left can remotely match the integrity of Marilyn Nelson and her importance to Minnesota business. And she is right. No incentive for me to remain in Minnesota if the amendment passes and I'll go to another state with my partner. Its bad for business and its a job killer.
Doing something for the sole purpose of harming some people makes those people upset and want to leave.
This is extraordinarily simple logic, and it's utterly undeniable.
It's extraordinarily simple logic that replacing the public rationales for the existence of civil marriage with private rationales will eventually lead to a decline in the esteem society holds for marriage (if not its legal abolishment).
Yet only marriage supporters have to show "proof" of their prognostications, while SSMers can spout laughable claims at will.
I'm 23 and am about to graduate with a master of electrical engineering from the University of Minnesota. Let's assume that the Minnesota amendment passes while the WA referendum to ban same-sex marriage fails. Can anyone explain to me why the heck I would want to stay here instead of moving to Seattle? Why would I choose to stay in a place where the voters have decided that I am such a threat that I can't marry and start my own family?
You wouldn't want to stay there.
However, the choice to stay there, or to move, is the same operation of mind that you compelled on yourself to choose to go homosexual.
Mr. (not so) Incredible - For the most part where we live is a choice (to the extent we have mobility) while sexual orientation is an innate characteristic. People are born gay. Deal with it.
Great point Mr. Incredible, this person freely chose his sexual behavior. He wants the right to act that way but not the responsibility that comes with it.
@Yoshi
Texas has the strongest economy in the country and they don't recognize most unmarried unions. Even Florida has a strong economy compared to most states and they have a marriage amendment.
Er...how am I trying to avoid any responsibility here? All I'm saying is that if I have a highly marketable skill set and given that, why should I stay in a state that would enshrine discrimination against me in it's constitution, instead of leaving for a state that's willing to recognize my right to marry?
Barry: "All I'm saying is that if I have a highly marketable skill set and given that, why should I stay in a state that would enshrine discrimination against me in it's constitution, instead of leaving for a state that's willing to recognize my right to marry?"
Perhaps you should ask this question to the Advocate. As noted in the article:
"The Advocate, a well-known gay and lesbian publication, recently published its third annual list of 'Gayest Cities in America.' A quick look at the list reveals that 12 of the 15 'Gayest Cities in America' are in states with marriage protection amendments, and many cities moved up in the Advocate's ranking despite being in states with marriage protection amendments, including the new first- and second-place cities. Clearly, marriage amendments don't seem to have caused gays and lesbians to avoid those states either."
Interesting. Could it be that there are more important issues to them than what a same-sex union is called?
This is ridiculous. Nelson was correct in saying an anti gay amendment would turn off LGBT and impact het business. she did not say that such a move would force her out of business or make her business unviable, which is the point NOM seems to want to argue. Now if Darrell wants to say that the hotels in anti gay states are in fact doing better, that would at least be on topic and refute Nelson's argument (despite being overly simplistic). It's this kind of crap that's why pro-LGBT states are growing in number, not shrinking.
Speaking for myself and my gay friends, we have talked about this, and we would move out of Minnesota if this does pass.
Why would we want to stay in a state where we are hated for being who we are?
I have written a blog on the 7 myths of the gay agenda. Everything has been lies from the very beginning. The basis, that they were born that way is the start of the BIG LIE. It is a behavior; the same as any other bad self-destruction act.. Sodomy and using animals has always been illegal until recently. God created male and female to propagate and create good taxpayers and workers; people that contributed to society not wanting to take benefits from it.
They claim God hates them but it is they that hate Christians because we say God abhors it. They do not have to stay there are many who have left that behavior.