NOM BLOG

FRC Asks if Starbucks is "Brew Heaven"?

 

The Family Research Council's Washington Update includes a prominent mention of our Dump Starbucks campaign today:

If Starbucks is a part of your daily grind, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) is giving customers a reason to reconsider. A portion of every cup of coffee helps to fund the corporate assault on marriage, the group says. To bring greater awareness to the company's ultra-liberal ties, NOM is launching an international campaign called "Dump Starbucks," targeting global business partners in particular. "We are today announcing a sustained public campaign calling on Starbucks to stop waging war against marriage, and the views of more than half its worldwide customers. Starbucks should be in the business of offering all its diverse customers a great cup of coffee, not taking sides against the views of its customers, vendors, and employees around the world."

The irony, of course, is CEO Howard Schultz's recent pronouncement that Starbucks is a post-political, post-partisan company. Of course, that turned out to be a grande exaggeration, since the franchise directly and publicly endorsed a bill to redefine marriage for the entire state of Washington. Jonathan Baker, head of NOM's Corporate Fairness Project, flew to Seattle to confront Schultz and asked his board if homosexual "marriage" really is "core to the Starbucks brand," as his vice president put it in January. "Yes," Schultz said. Another shareholder spoke up and asked how it could be in the company's interest to wage a cultural war. Schultz abruptly cut off questions. If you'd like to learn about NOM's "Dump Starbucks" campaign or sign the pledge, click here.

2 Comments

  1. Good News
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    Good news.

  2. L. Marie
    Posted March 23, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    "The irony, of course, is CEO Howard Schultz's recent pronouncement that Starbucks is a post-political, post-partisan company. Of course, that turned out to be a grande exaggeration, since the franchise directly and publicly endorsed a bill to redefine marriage for the entire state of Washington."

    Ouch. I guess that position was short lived. Unless, By that did he mean that he supported a world where only his view was valid? I wonder.