NOM BLOG

NOM Announces International Protest of Starbucks

 

Dump Starbucks

Dear Marriage Supporter,

We are urging consumers across the globe to "Dump Starbucks" because the massive international corporation has taken a corporate-wide position that marriage between one man and one woman should be eliminated and that same-sex marriage should become the norm.

As such, Starbucks has declared it will use its influence and resources in a culture war against at least half its US customers, and against the vast majority of its international consumers who do not share Starbucks' position.

On January 24, 2012, the Starbucks corporation issued a memorandum to all "US Partners" declaring that same-sex marriage "is aligned with Starbucks business practices" and "is core to who we are and what we value as a company."

In addition to declaring its corporate-wide position in support of gay marriage, Starbucks also used its resources to participate in a legal case seeking to overturn a federal law declaring marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

In taking these actions, Starbucks has declared a culture war on all people of faith (and millions of others) who believe that the institution of marriage as one man and one woman is worth preserving.

NOM does not take this step lightly.

Unlike our opponents, we would never take action against a corporation because of the statements of one of its executives. However, Starbucks has declared gay marriage to be a corporate value and has intentionally inserted itself into the debate. Furthermore, NOM officials attended a meeting of the Board of Directors of Starbuck to bring this issue to their attention, and they did nothing.

This is why we must urge all consumers to "dump Starbucks," as well as Seattle's Best Coffee and Evolution Fresh juices, which are owned by Starbucks.

Dump Starbucks

A portion of every cup of coffee purchased at a Starbucks anywhere in the world goes to fund this corporate assault on marriage. Voters in thirty US states have voted to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. No state vote has ever supported gay marriage.

In many areas of the world where Starbucks does business, the concept of "gay marriage" is unheard of and deeply offensive to cultural, moral and religious values. We urge consumers across the globe to join the "Dump Starbucks" campaign.

By going to www.dumpstarbucks.com, you can sign our petition, and take action to contact Starbucks directly. You can also see places near you where you can buy coffee rather than patronize Starbucks. Let your local Starbucks manager and the corporate leadership know that you've joined the Dump Starbucks campaign, and tell them where you'll be going instead to buy coffee.

Please sign the Dump Starbucks petition to register your protest of Starbucks waging a culture war against its customers who believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

The National Organization for Marriage Education Fund is a 501(c)(3) organization, gifts to which are deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax purposes.

115 Comments

  1. Es
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    It is time to boycott all companies that support SSM

  2. Whitney
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

    Oh Starbucks! You've betrayed us!! No more of my bucks to your company :(((

  3. AD
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

    I'm sure all 7 of you will have a huge effect on Starbucks.

  4. Andrew Marr
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 10:55 pm | Permalink

    You are a bunch of backwoods neanderthals and your efforts to scare other people's humanity into submission are pathetic. Maggie Gallagher, if you are listening, please seek counseling and stop taking out your sexual frustration out on innocent people.

  5. Stefan
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    What about MicroSoft?

  6. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:16 pm | Permalink

    900 and counting in just a few hours!

  7. Andrew
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:21 pm | Permalink

    Not so sure this is a good idea. Boycotts are generally very counter productive. They mostly amount to lots of free publicity for the target group. The Southern Baptist boycott of Disney comes to mind. Or the boycott of J.C.Penney for a recent example.

    As a disinterested bystander, I'd recommend a different tactic. In case anyone cares to hear my two cents.

  8. Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:27 pm | Permalink

    Also email and message your local supermarket to stop selling starbucks products in their stores.

  9. AnonyGrl
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:35 pm | Permalink

    Starbucks is NOT saying that marriage between men and women should be eliminated. This is a meme that REALLY isn't working for you, and you should REALLY stop trying to push that lie. It makes you look like morons.

  10. Leo
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:37 pm | Permalink

    Andrew boycotts work if you know what you are doing... As a business major, I foresee success in NOM's approach to boycott Starbucks. Most importantly, NOM can NOT ease off once committed. Bad publicity from the other side for the petition, does not equal good publicity for Startbucks.

  11. Leo
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:41 pm | Permalink

    AnonyGrl,
    your attitude and the likes will be the reason why people will stop buying coffee from Start Bucks and those like the company.

  12. Zack
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:47 pm | Permalink

    I don't support same-sex marriage and would like it to be defined via amendment. But Starbucks is a tad too good for me to give up.

    Now it's been a while since I actually ordered anything from them...just sayin.

  13. Leviticus
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

    I don't think their coffee bean suppliers will support their homosexual agenda. Can't make coffee if you can get the beans.

  14. Steve
    Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    Great! Keep up the good work. I really appreciate the shorter lines!

  15. John Noe
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:07 am | Permalink

    Their product was a ripoff and overpriced to begin with so this will be an easy boycott.

  16. Mike
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:44 am | Permalink

    Well, I intend to visit Starbucks as often as possible now.

  17. JR
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:50 am | Permalink

    Brian's first paragraph represents a new low for NOM as it can only rely on lies to spread its message of hate. Do you guys have an ounce of self-respect?

  18. Rob
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:31 am | Permalink

    What does supporting marriage equality have to do with denying children a mom and a dad? Gays are a very small group; gays who get married are an even smaller group; gays who want children are an even smaller group than that; just admit the recent prop 8 ruling basically gutted all arguements against same sex marriage (just read the ruling). Like it or not, NOMs game is basically over; their last resort is to throw children under the bus and use them in a desperate ploy to promote inequality.

  19. Little man
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:03 am | Permalink

    I think the Starbucks corporate staff are drinking too many cups of coffee per day, so they cannot think straight. Same sex is not marriage, it is friendship, and no one has anything against friendships. We do have something to drink to: real marriage. I have been going to Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, which has much better sandwiches and pastries not loaded with sugar. Sugar and coffee and milk is generally worse for health than black coffee alone. Starbucks makes good coffee, but their marketing strategy is errant. It easier not to do something (don't buy at Starbucks) than to do something. Bye. And i'll go an tell the staff why i am going next door to Jamba juice, aside from that it is healthier.

  20. ChuckGG
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:09 am | Permalink

    I read the first paragraph of Brian's article. Where did Starbucks say "that marriage between one man and one woman should be eliminated...?" I never drew that conclusion from their statements. Perhaps, recognizing same-sex marriage in addition to straight marriage, but I saw no intention to eliminate the latter.

    I have already heard from a bunch of friends who plan to buy more Starbucks at the shops and the grocery stores. This boycott will be unsuccessful.

  21. Chairm
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:18 am | Permalink

    Anonygirl and Charles J Mueller:

    You offer good advice. Lies are not good policy and not tactically smart either.

    Brian Brown said "marriage between one man and one woman" by which he referred to the legal requirement of man and woman in marriage law. That is a requirement you and the SSM campaign seek to eliminate.

    It hardly makes sense to deny the express goal of the SSM campaign.

    Brian spoke the truth. This is a conflict of ideas in which the SSM idea is proposed as the replacement of the marriage idea and what it makes normative. His work is defending and promoting the marriage idea against those who would replace it with the SSM idea.

    S.S.M. = the Specious Substitution of Marriage.

    Given the insistence of the SSM campaign that the marriage idea is hateful and bigoted, their goal is to use governmental power to force society to demote the marriage idea from its preferential satus in our laws and culture and coercively marginalize it to a barely tolerative status.

    Denying this would be disingenuous, as Charles might advise.

    _ __ _

    Anonygirl,

    You did not accurately represent what was said. You setup a strawman when you said "marriage between men and women" as the target of elimination. That is a falsehood.

    If you repeat it in a effort to turn that falsehood into a meme, rather than correct yourself here, then, you will declare yourself a willful liar.

    According to your own advice, that would make you and fellow SSMers look like morons.

    Charles agreed with your remarks and added oomph with his phrase, "disingenuous lies" by which he apparently meant deliberate untruths told with the false appearance of simple frankness.

    Your advice is good but misplaced. Look to yourselves and show more candor in your advocacy for the elimination of the requirement of one man and one woman. Drop the facade of helpful frankness and try to do better than rushing to misrepresent and to generate an untrue meme.

    _ _ _ _

    You could start with the basics. See the following twofold challenge to SSMers.

    http://opine-editorals.blogspot.com/2012/03/is-same-sex-sexual-behavior-moral-ever.html

    The query is for the moral argument in favor of moral approbation for same-sex sexual behavior (a claimed argument which is brazely assumed or asserted but not substantiated); and upon that argument is another about which we query -- what is the moral argument that morally equates same-sex sexual behavior with the coital relations of husband and wife? In other words make your case for What is Marriage?

    The details are at the link. Comment here or there if you feel competent to engage the actual disagreement and conflict over ideas.

    What is your argument that you will stand by (or fall from if repudiated)? Not someone else's attempted argument. Your own -- the moral argument that has convinced YOU to support the elimination of the man-woman requirement.

    Be candid. Be frank. Be truthul. Do not rely on memes. Follow your previously stated invitation to do better.

    Thanks,
    Chairm Ohn

  22. Chairm
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:27 am | Permalink

    ChuckGG,the answer to your question is in my previous blogpost.

    What is Starbuck's reason for doing this? Does the company presume to speak for ALL employees and ALL stockholders an ALL customers when it claims this is their "core" thingamajig? They must have an extraordinary reason to do such a thing and to turn their coffee biz into a political venue.

    That they are doing it does not make it right nor does it make SSM right. But they are free to do it anyway. As long as they do not allow progay bigotry to intimidate employees or to make employees act against their conscience.

  23. Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:49 am | Permalink

    A challenge to proponents of SSM is at the following link (now repaired) --

    http://opine-editorials.blogspot.com/2012/03/is-same-sex-sexual-behavior-moral-ever.html

    .

  24. Paul Mc
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:13 am | Permalink

    Chaim, your link contains no actual arguments. It just reiterates questions over and over. Sorry... Debate you? No can do. Nothing to argue against.

  25. Little man
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 5:44 am | Permalink

    ?Sharing petition link to our Facebook page doesn't work. After posting, nothing is added to our Facebook page. Is Facebook filtering our own posts?

  26. Good News
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:00 am | Permalink

    Starbucks wants to steal away the word marriage from the man-woman union. That is hateful.
    New unions need new words to name them.
    STOP STARBUCK'S HATE!
    And allow man and woman to name their own union.

  27. Leah
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 7:41 am | Permalink

    This is completely false and fabricated, I've been a Starbucks employee for almost 5 years, no statement was issued, and IN FACT, Starbucks encourages partners to feel comfortable, and would never do such a thing. They allow same-sex couples to be under the Starbucks employee's insurance.

  28. ResistSSA
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    Why does Starbucks take such a strong stance in this matter?

    Well, it's certainly not that they care so much about homosexual couples that they're willing to risk a loss of business on an issues in which the country is, at best, evenly divided and more likely 75-25 or more against it.

    No, this is about a well-healed investor with ties to homosexual activism. While I don't recall how Starbucks overcame its sudden fall off in sales a couple of years back, it doesn't take a mental giant to figure out that there is something unusual going on when a recently failing company takes such a polarizing position on such a divisive issue.

    Starbucks is a business; if I were a stockholder and knew there was a a virtual profit guarantee from cheering for faux-marriages to pacify a wealthy homosexual activist, I'd consider cheering too (then sell my stock).

  29. Kristen
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    This 'dump starbucks' movement is absolutely ridiculous. Starbucks does so many wonderful things for our environment, economy, and treats their employees better than most companies. How many companies offer full health benefits for part time employees? Just because they support freedom, which true Americans are supposed to do, does not mean they are waging a war on anyone. Ever heard of the separation of church and state? Religion should not dictate the laws of our country...that's precisely why our founders began this country. If anything, the Starbucks corporation is being more patriotic than any of you who oppose the freedom and rights of others.

  30. Randy E King
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:25 am | Permalink

    Starbucks has declared war on the right of conscience and the free exercise thereof. The decadent elite in their ivory tower have just declared their intent to codify severance from humanity into law.

    "It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins" Benjamin Franklin

  31. Leviticus
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    The corporate attack on of people of faith will not stand. Faith communities will stand up to this.

  32. Litterial Wesley
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    I often feel conflicted about spending money at Starbucks rather than at local coffe shops. Thanks to this reactionary idiocy from NOM, I'll feel a lot less guilty about doing so. FWIW, I am happily married to a member of the opposite sex.

  33. Robert
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    When will you guys realize that your boycotts actually HELP these businesses? In case you haven't noticed, the majority of people reject your b------y and look upon you with disgust. Like everything else NOM attempts, this will be a major and embarrassing FAIL.

  34. Robert
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    When will you guys realize that your boycotts actually HELP these businesses? In case you haven't noticed, the majority of people reject your b------y and look upon you with disgust. Like everything else NOM attempts, this will be a major and embarrassing FAIL!

  35. Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    Paul Mc the challenge is presented as questioing the moral assumptions of SSMers. If you do not hold those assumptions, then, your saying so would be your answer to that query.

    An SSMer could be someone who'd SSM o someone who advocates for SSM -- but most SSMers, by far, are simply supporters of SSM. That is, SSM[support]ers.

    Paul Mc do you count yourself among them? If so the claim to something (i.e. the claim to marriage) depends on changing the marriage status quo and the onus is on the would-be changer.

    It also depends on meeting the challenge put forth one way one the other. Here is a public discourse and opportunity for the SSMer to make a stand on the moral assumptions at issue in SSM argumentation and rhetoric. That query is the overall context for actions suh as those of Starbucks and people who agree with what that corporate entity has done.

  36. C L
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    you should boycott starbucks anyway. Make your own coffee and save about 50% or more of your coffee costs. And it tastes better, and its better for you, and you dont have to wait in line and deal with bad service. Or deal with supporting some ideology when all you want is freaking cup of java.

  37. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Dump Starbucks.... they're overpriced anyway.

  38. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    "Why does Starbucks take such a strong stance in this matter?"

    I agree Resist. It doesn't make business sense to alienate large numbers of your consumer base. Not a smart move on their part.

  39. Louis E.
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    Robert,the majority of people share the attitude you slander as "bigotry".

  40. Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

    Right, because that worked so well for JCPenny... LOL!!
    I'm actually gonna be glad to not see any of you NOM bigots at my Starbucks!!

    @PumpStarbucks

  41. Posted March 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

    Thanks, I was already boycotting them but I will certainly sign the petition and if there was a button with the "Dump Starbucks" I would certainly pin it on me lapel :-)

  42. Jay
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    why are people so threatened by equality? These posts all sound like frightened bigots hiding behind the thin veil of religion. Stop oppression.

  43. Jacci Kolb
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

    I have been a loyal customer, however this will have to end our relationship. It is too bad!

  44. Robert
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    Louis: You're delusional of you think that the majority of people share your extremism.

  45. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    Jacci, No one is threatened by all humans being equal. That's a false argument. What we disagree with is certain political activists trying to mandate the redefninition of marriage. You can believe as you choose, in fact I support tolerance in the workplace, but tolerance does not require redefining marriage. Marriage has never meant whatever you want. Kick and scream about the facts of life all you want, but marriage is marriage. You don't have the right to redefine it for everyone else.

  46. DM
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    Ditto :
    When will you guys realize that your boycotts actually HELP these businesses? In case you haven't noticed, the majority of people reject your b------y and look upon you with disgust. Like everything else NOM attempts, this will be a major and embarrassing FAIL!

  47. Quinn
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

    Hateful bigotry never wins. How about spending your time and money on something that will help the world instead of this nonsense?

  48. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    Nothing is more important than marriage and family to society, Quinn. That's where it all begins.

  49. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

    I support marriage and family. That's not hate. You and I can disagree, but that's called disagreement. Not hate.

  50. Courtney
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    I think I'm headed to Starbucks right now! I've been long overdue! Boycotts only help businesses. Look at JC Penney. I have strong Christian values but am 100% in support of same sex marriage. The government shouldn't be able to dictate who we marry.

  51. Raynd
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    I agree they've taken a pretty narrow worldview lately.

    Last Christmas, I went to Starbucks' website to buy a gift card as a Christmas present. I could not find a card labeled "Merry Christmas". I found "Hanukkah" and "Kwanzaa" labeled cards. I contacted their customer service and was told that their holiday offerings were holiday tree and snowman cards. It is obvious that the company wants and expects to make money off of the Christmas holiday, but it does not give the same respect to Christians as it does to Jews and African Americans. It does not bother me that they offer holiday cards for other beliefs, but I should be offered the same respect as they showed others.

    So much for tolerance.

  52. Karen
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    L. Marie, you have said many hateful and snide things about gay people on this blog before. Stop playing the holier-than-thou victim. You hate gay people - own it.

  53. M
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    right people with the agreement of this do not want us who disagree to have a voice and call us haters but they want to make sure they are heard. Yea that is is just way to easy to do the name calling and excuses and I am so over it.

  54. DKCMO
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

    LMarie,

    What a stupid you are. No one who is for marriage equality is against marriage and family. You dumb b, you don't really expect us to believe that you've convinced yourself gay marriage equality supporters are against or in "disagreement" with marriage and family. Convieniently you think homosexuals aren't in the "family" of "marriage" cards because you're an intolerant bigoted s. This is what you disagree with marriage equality advocates about, your s betterosexual attitude and demeanor. Suck that one you pathetic loser.

  55. Leila
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    I have been coming to the Starbucks at 1503 NE MLK Blvd, Portland, OR for 7 years. It used to be my favorite part of the day. I chose this particular Starbucks because I could come and have a quiet time in a comfortable chair, to rejuvenate and forget the world in a book.

    It's too bad they don't support families anymore. I'll be sad to see them go, but attacking marriage is just not something I can support with my dollars.

  56. Mian Lee
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Permalink

    I'm currently a college student and I make it a routine to visit Starbucks whenever I have a huge exam coming up or final exams. It's a great place to study and enjoy my favorite coffee at the same time.... but did they think we all wanted to hear about their political opinions? I'm sorry, that's not something I'll be supporting. There's nothing more important than supporting family.

  57. DKCMO
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

    Leila,

    You're another stupid ignorant bigot.
    NOT ONE OF YOU BIGOTS HAS THE GUTS TO GO ONE ON ONE WITH A HOMOSEXUAL WITH YOUR PATHETIC TRIPE!!!! That's the last laugh.

  58. Shoshi Brocklin
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    I looked upon their stores as a familiar friend in a very unfamiliar place when I traveled. I had no idea they were supporting some radical political agenda. I have to say, I'm really disappointed.

  59. DKCMO
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    Oh look, mian lee, a gook who is well a discriminator.

  60. Rodelle
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

    I visit Starbucks at least three times a week at the Marrero, Louisiana location. I was there this morning at 6:15, but that will be my last stop.

    I support marriage, thanks for all you're doing, I just wanted you all to know, I'm with you here in LA!

  61. DKCMO
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

    And shoshi, yet another minority sh****n on another minority. What ignorance.

  62. JR
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Soshi - What is so radical about supporting equality for their employees as well as their customers. I support "traditional" marriage. But that is not the only way so I support marriage equality. I do not seek to deny rights to anyone.

  63. dd
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

    I made my first comment on here, a simple business case, as to why their decision may actually be more profitable for stakeholders, but alas it was not accepted.

  64. Rodelle
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    DKC... your racism has no place here. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

  65. Brie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    Supporting traditional marriage means supporting all of it, what it is, not what it is not. I support marriage and families. Mother nature doesn't lie.

    Dump Starbucks!
    and Dump DKCMO! Do you really think insulting people and calling them names brings glory to the gay cause brother?

    Booo.

  66. Northerner
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    You'll save enough dollars shortly by not buying coffee at a shop everyday to purchase your own decent coffee/espresso machine in due time. Then all the $ you save making your own coffee could be donated to the charity of your choice if you have no other needs or wants to spend your money on.

  67. positraction
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    Good luck with your forlorn little campaign. I'm sure Starbucks will miss you as much as Disney does, which still hosts "Gay Days" every year.

  68. AD
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

    Starbucks supports marriage and family - for everyone.
    The only thing they're against is your bigotry.

  69. Brie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    Whenever I start to think the LGBT lobby has something going for it, they start opening their mouths and letting their real values show. Sorry guys, it's just not helping anyone. Tolerance doesn't call names.

  70. M. Jones
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    I will not any business with a company that is anti-family, anti-marriage, and anti-Christian.

  71. Tyrell
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    Aw Starbucks! Say it aint so! Man I hate it when the little guys turn into ugly thugs. How can I support a place that thinks I'm a bigot for supporting marriage and family? Nothanks.

  72. ChuckGG
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

    Some have asked why Starbucks would take such a position and some have suggested it is some kind of "homosexual activism," whatever that is.

    I suspect it is more down to earth. Starbucks wants to attract dedicated workers and provide benefits to ALL its employees, just as do Microsoft and Apple. Employees are their biggest assets. Additionally, Starbucks has an upscale crowd which tends to be more educated, liberal, and tolerant. I think they weighed the numbers and determined they'd be ahead going this route.

  73. Randy E King
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    positraction.

    Disney does not host "Gay" days. "Gay" days is a mass resistance day established by the LGBT that Disney does not sanction in any official capacity other than to allow you to spend your money at their parks on the days you decide to attend.

  74. Rover Serton
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

    The comments are swooping downward, Lets disagree without being disagreeable!

  75. M. Jones
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

    @ChuckGG, so Starbucks decided to be in the marriage business? Because they have an upscale crowd. I'm sorry, but marriage will be just fine on its own, without a business partner.. Still to your core business, uhmmm ... coffee?

  76. ResistSSA
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

    @ChucCG says" Starbucks has an upscale crowd which tends to be more educated....

    That's funny, because I've noticed that all the secretaries in my office (who really can't afford their prices) get their coffee there; not exactly upscale or educated. Those of us in the office who are educated - smart enough to know that $5 for a coffee concoction is a rip-off - bring in coffee from home or go to Dunkin' Donuts.

    I'll give you "liberal," which to me means elitist without cause, schooled but not very bright, gullible, and trendy. In other words, college kids and recent grads who haven't lived in the real world yet (or those who long for the days when they were)

  77. jewell
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    ive always thought starbucks is over rated, and i dont buy thier crap. Just another reason to not go there.

  78. John M.
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for letting me know! Going to buy a cup of Starbucks right now to support this company in its efforts to achieve marriage equality!

    Good work NOM! I wouldn't have known to support Starbucks without you.

  79. David
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

    Get angry all you want but if your going to make a difference learn how! All I see now are post on FB about people going out and purposely shopping at Starbucks today. Gotta love the short sidedness of this movement.....LOL!

  80. billybob
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    so NOM are now anarchists? boycotting a company that is obeying the law of the land and in favour of following the law of the land? When will the suicide bombings start?

  81. John M.
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    One other thing Mr. Brown: Your article incorrectly states that Starbucks has adopted the "corporate-wide position that marriage between one man and one woman should be eliminated." I think you need to check your facts / read the dumpstarbucks.com website, which says that the company has taken the position that the DEFINITION of marriage between on man and on woman should be eliminated.

    Eliminating a definition is a lot different than eliminating marriage. Are you with me and do you understand the difference? I know it might be hard because you are narrow minded, but really try to stretch your mind. Hopefully you will correct your blatantly false and misleading statement.

  82. Karen
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    So your group uses plagiarized photos to make it look like more people come to your "rallies" (Obama campaign photos no less) and you want people to think that you are on the up and up and just looking out for the moral fiber of America? Shoot where can I get stock in Starbucks?

  83. Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

    Paul Mc said, "Chaim, your link contains no actual arguments. It just reiterates questions over and over. Sorry... Debate you? No can do. Nothing to argue against."

    I have to say, I have yet to see anyone best Chairm in an argument. The pro-SSM argument never can hold water.

  84. Little man
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    DKCMO: Your comment proves what your cause is all about - crudeness as a 'right'. Yeah, right...

  85. DG
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

    I never used to buy starbucks before... after reading this I became a regular customer.

  86. Little man
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    Starbucks pushed local coffee shops out of business. Yes, they made the local coffee shop, which hired live musicians twice a week, go out of business. What they sell is not coffee - they sell A/C, nice rest-rooms, and table space. Now, the competitors of Starbucks have a chance, which i am sure they will take. Already Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf (also) offers the same, if not better commodities, and much better sandwiches. Starbucks is ready for a decline.

  87. Little man
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 6:53 pm | Permalink

    I would be willing to teach anyone how to get and make the best coffee in their life, as long as they go to a Starbucks counter and tell the staff you used to buy their products, but cannot any longer because part of the profit would go to changing the definition of marriage, legally.

    Starbucks is one of the first companies who has become political, not each staff member personally, but as a corporation. I saw that in the HRC web page, and reported it to NOM staff. The HRC corporate ratings have now disappeared from their web page.

    One video link provided by NOM shows how the question about whether the Board made the decision was evaded. "Senior Staff" made the decision, and point to recent (temporary) increase in stock value or profits. They say The Board of Starbucks was "told". Sure, just wait until the word gets around, and the decision in Washington State will affect Starbucks much more in the rest of the country.

    This is the easiest boycott, and now it is really getting interesting. Don't make predictions, just wait and see :)

  88. John Noe
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

    Great posts L. Marie and you know when you are doing a great job when the opponents start attacking you personally.

  89. Tess
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

    I used to take NOM seriously. I used to get really upset when I read their hateful messages. Then I read this. Just a little helpful tip, NOM... if you're going to argue for or against something, please get your facts straight. Please tell me when Starbucks said that "marriage between one man and one woman should be eliminated and that same-sex marriage should become the norm."
    Oh wait, they never said that. Really, it makes you look like total idiots. So now when I see NOM posts, I laugh and remember that you're an organization based on lies and misinformation.

  90. Little man
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    How crass and rude DKCMO's comments are. It comes under the heading of 'hate speech'. Oh! forgot: there are two sets of rules, one for us and one for them. We will keep a copy to expose your 'tolerant' and 'un-bigoted' remarks. Thanks for taking your mask off so we see what you are really like. Were you 'born' that way?

  91. Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    Dear DKCMO,

    Do you know what a subpoena is? I'm saving your comments for a lawsuit filed against you. Just try and figure out what the nature of the lawsuit will be.

    --Victor Golf Charles

  92. A Normal Human Being
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    You people suck.

  93. Tyrell
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

    "you know when you are doing a great job when the opponents start attacking you personally."

    That's right!

  94. Raynd
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

    Little Man, it's a gravatar... globally recognized avatar. You can link one to your email address here: https://en.gravatar.com/emails

  95. Jillian
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

    Cool!

    Now more Starbucks coffee for me! :-))))

  96. Jillian
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

    Cool!

    Now more Starbucks coffee for me! :-))))

  97. Jillian
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    Soooo. Let's me get this straight Marie L.
    So let say your civil rights were being denied and I actively campaigned to keep you as a 2nd class citizen: that would be okay with you? It would be okay for me to "disagree" with you on whether or not you get those civil rights?

    Here's the thing about rights. They're not supposed to be voted on. That's why we call them rights.

    I don't "argue" human rights. I stand up for them.

  98. Mindy
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:22 pm | Permalink

    I won't have a problem with this, because I never liked Starbucks coffee. But I will spread this info. to all my friends and family. I hope Starbucks goes down the drain financially.

  99. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:41 pm | Permalink

    Jillian, you and I are equal. Perfectly so. Isn't it great?

  100. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:42 pm | Permalink

    Do I agree that marriage should exclude a gender by design? No. Does that mean we're now unequal? No. It just means I support mother nature, society and families.

  101. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:44 pm | Permalink

    DKCMO, really? Let us know what you Really think. Watch out there, your brand of tolerance is showing.

  102. L. Marie
    Posted March 22, 2012 at 11:46 pm | Permalink

    "I have yet to see anyone best Chairm in an argument. The pro-SSM argument never can hold water."

    True. Chairm knows his stuff better than anyone I've had the pleasure of debating with.

  103. Ben Hennesy
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 3:05 am | Permalink

    Knowing NOM's track record with boycotts this will hardly make a dent in Starbuck's business.

  104. Little man
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 5:05 am | Permalink

    So,... Jillian: Let's say your rights are NOT being denied. What then? Don't presume you have a right, before proving it. Otherwise, anyone can simply argue as you, that their invented right is being denied them. Supreme Court precedence says you never had the right you claim you are supposedly being denied. No: Marriage is not just friendship. Why would the government want to subsidize or give special privileges to ALL friendships? Where's all the money coming from, and who cares?

  105. Ash
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    Yay Starbucks ! :)

  106. Skooter McGoo
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    Marriage licenses are issued by the state, not the church. No religion is necessary for a marriage to be legal, valid or recognized.

  107. Ash
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    Great point, Little man. They start the discussion by *assuming* that redefining marriage is a "right." With that idea, anyone can claim that what they want is automatically a "right," and thus to oppose them is to deny them their "rights" and treat them as a "second-class citizen."

  108. sourpatch
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    As a supporter of what can only be known as TRUE marriage (am I right guyys?), I'm just curious as to where and WHY we only want to support true marriage.

    What is it about a man and woman being married that's so different from anyone else? How is this different from blacks marrying whites?

  109. Hahahah
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    hahahah you guys have absolutely no lives... how incredibly pathetic... nomblog? hahahaha, mind your own business and stop being such failures in life and try to amount to something positive like helping somebody or achieving excellence in your field. this is pathetic..

  110. Ryan
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for the info, NOM bigots! I'll be stopping at Starbucks for coffee EVERYDAY from now on.

  111. Posted March 25, 2012 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    I just signed.

    Ignacio, from Spain.

  112. Rico
    Posted March 25, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    one of the United Nations resolutions is that every child is entitled to their father and mother. Sjo called same-sex marriage negates this.

  113. Rico
    Posted March 25, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    marriage has always been about one man and one woman and any children that come from it. This is from every culture from the beginning of time. I am not against homosexuals as people. I am against the redefinition of marriage.

  114. Lisa Watkins
    Posted March 26, 2012 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    Wow! Really? Shame on Starbucks! Never get another $ from me.

  115. Little man
    Posted March 29, 2012 at 8:22 pm | Permalink

    Dream on, Jillian:

    How does one know which Rights are Rights and should not be voted on? Ask you? So, now you've found a way to nullify voter initiatives and referendums. You mist be a genius of a lawyer.

    You say: 'Here's the thing about rights. They're not supposed to be voted on. That's why we call them rights. ... I don't "argue" human rights. I stand up for them.'

    So, if i stand up for my right to steal your stereo set, i can steal your stereo set?

    So, then, how come legislatures keep voting on bills that define civil marriage. They should just stand up for them... And how come siblings don't have a right to marry, though mental retards do?

    But keep commenting. I really get a laugh, seeing how your side tries to be 'reasonable' and present 'arguments'. :) Have you considered becoming a 'stand up' comedian?

2 Trackbacks

  1. [...] NOM Announces International Protest of Starbucks – via NOM Blog [...]

  2. [...] organisation américaine dédiée à la défense du mariage, la National Organization for Marriage, lance une campagne de boycott de la célèbre chaîne en raison de l’engagement anti-mariage de cette [...]