Welcome to the DumpStarbucks.com News!
Is there a business case to support Starbucks' endorsement of same-sex marriage?
The numbers say no, but same-sex marriage advocates continue to say yes. Let's look at some hard facts.
Earlier this year, ChiefExecutive.net surveyed over 650 CEOs and gathered their opinions on which states were best for business. All of the top ten states they chose define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. According to a 2008 Pew Research Center study, seven of the top ten destination states for population migration had defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman in their state constitution. In 2011, Moody's Analytics forecasted the top ten states for job growth. Nine of the top ten states for projected growth had marriage amendments in their state constitutions.
These facts and figures do not prove that defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman causes economic success, but they do show that same-sex marriage is not a requirement for economic growth or corporate success, nor a sound component of an economic development plan.
What you can do this week:
Last week a committed supporter of marriage shared hundreds of our DumpStarbucks.com flyers at the Texas GOP convention. The thousands of delegates, alternates, and their families had the opportunity to read how Starbucks as a corporation is supporting a cause they find objectionable and learn what they can do about the situation. Please consider printing a few copies of the flyer and share them with family, friends, and at public events this summer.
Our protest continues to grow!
Christian Response Alerts has launched their own boycott against Starbucks and collected over 3,300 signatures of their own. Add that to the current DumpStarbucks.com total and we have over 47,000 individuals who have Dumped Starbucks!
Thank you for your support and have a great week!
58 Comments
Wow! That would be about 208 for each member state of the United Nations.
Nice sign! Perfect for the times.
Interestingly, it's also about 210 signatures per day. But that's small change compared to the 650,000 signatures in support of Starbucks over at sumofus.org.
I must say I'm impressed that you haven't quietly dropped this failed, useless boycott. Three months and you've not even managed to come up with enough names to fill half a college football stadium? In a "global effort"? A truly remarkable fail.
I wonder how many folks have dumped Starbucks and not signed the petition. No matter, the numbers are growing daily, and people are finding creative ways to get the word out. Thanks for the update.
The "hard facts" are that Starbucks puts its partners first. That's a solid business case.
"I wonder how many folks have dumped Starbucks and not signed the petition."
Similarly, I wonder how many people have begun patronizing or increased the frequency of their visits to Starbucks and not signed the "thank you" petition which had over 650K signatures without having to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a global campaign.
47,000 people I assume are committed to not buying from Starbucks anymore can do quite a bit of damage. Depending on the concentration of that group, it could put a couple of cafe's out of business.
That's almost a quarter of a million dollars a month of potential profit that starbucks won't be getting. I know it what I say will be shrugged off but it's worth pointing this out.
@Sammy
"The "hard facts" are that Starbucks puts its partners first. That's a solid business case."
What you mean to say is that Starbucks puts the partners it agrees with first. Siding against the vast majority of your customers is never a smart business decision.
Just ask JC Penney's.
Nice flyer Jon:
I'm going to post these flyer every where in Downtown Hartford, Ct. The State where an activist judge(s) made gay marriage legal.
I'm going to take some photos of my work and make them available to NOMers here.
Leo:
You'll see the photos of our work on Election Night.
I wonder how many people signed this petition but were not actually Starbucks customers to begin with. Losing business from someone who wasn't actually a customer doesn't really hurt them.
Every single time anyone posts, reads, distributes, talks about, or personally decides to participate in the boycott....
It helps us.
Astroturfers don't get grass roots.
That's why they can;t defeat us in elections.
Way to go on the SBUX campaign, NOM.
Slow and steady, wins the race.
@AD: Probably the majority of them. Homeschooling moms in the Bible Belt aren't sipping $5 lattes as their afternoon pick me up. There is also a large contingent of people - I know several myself - who
had generally tried to steer their business toward smaller local, independent cafe's etc. who have begun also visiting Starbucks as a result of their pro-equality stance.
Worthy ladies, no doubt.
What strikes me as interesting is the profound denial of political reality which seeks, even to itself, to ascribe political victories in 33 states as attributable to "Homeschooling moms in the Bible Belt".
It's a good thing to see this through the eyes of the opposition sometimes.
A very encouraging thing indeed.
@Randy King - inclusiveness vs. exclusiveness - it is only NOM who is against one portion of society.
Randy, 47,000 people signed the dump Starbucks petition. Over 650,000 signed the Thank You Starbucks letter. How does that translate to siding against the vast majority of your customers?
Stefan:
In exactly the same way that your hundreds of victories in the polls have translated to thirty three consecutive electoral defeats.
Most folks aren't politically active, in fact most folks are exasperated by the intrusion of politics into their lives.
But that changes in an election year.
Pseudo-marriage is going to play a very significant role on the margins in the election, and the SBUX boycott is an excellent stage in building the ground game that will count.
But as I said above, astroturf does;t understand grass roots.
You guys are an astroturf operation.
We are a grass roots operation.
Grass roots win elections.
Astroturf wins polls.
Let's not forget the many Mormons who signed the pledge who never drank coffee anyway.
I wonder how many Mormons signed the pledge who don't drink coffee anyway.
Funny stuff.
The opposition has a remarkably ignorant picture of what they perceive as flyover states being just like Mayberry. They pretend to know the habits of homeschooling moms.
If they'd ever visit these mysterious places they might learn some manners.
And they'd finally understand why it is they get to eat every day.
@Sammy,
Inclusive: including many things or everything
Exclusiveness: limited to a group of people, especially one considered fashionable or wealthy
Starbucks as embraced the later by excluding support for traditionalists in favor of a well heeled horde of decadent miscreants. You miscreant should really avoid trying to be clever with words; language is not your strong suit.
Stefan,
The theoretical 650k are locked in gains; whereas the 45K is a realized loss.
Thanks for this pro-same-sex-marriage post. After all, if there's no financial or business case to be made, then Starbucks must be doing it because it's the morally right thing to do -- an acknowledgment of dignity and respect for all of its employees and customers, regardless of their sexual orientation.
Thanks, NOM, for making this clear!
tam,
Starbucks is in business to make money for its shareholders; not pimp political agendas. Violating the trust of its investors is anything else but moral.
Yes, Randy... if your ridiculous rhetoric makes you feel better...
Also, and we're all just revisiting this, but if you saw the actual video of Howard Schultz responding, you'll remember that the place erupted in applause in support of his response. A large room of shareholders. I know it's been asked many times, but why doesn't NOM launch boycotts against the other Pacific Northwest companies (Microsoft, Nike, Amazon) that have also come out in support of marriage equality. They've made it clear that they are not neutral
I don't even care for Starbucks, and don't give them business, only because I don't care for their coffee. But now I'll give them business like Starbucks cards or coffee for gifts. So I'm not a realized loss or theoretical gain. But the boycott has given them a customer they never had.
The marriage corruption movement is all about form over substance. From faux families to trumped up polls and manipulated "scientific" data; whereas traditionalists rack up substantive arguments in defense of the laws of nature that are based on the "Gold Standard.”
"If they'd ever visit these mysterious places they might learn some manners."
Hmm, manners. You mean like referring to people's children as pets. Barb. No thank you, my parents raised me better than that.
Randy, Quit your nonsense "gold standard" garbage. The ability to have sexual intercourse does not automatically make one a good parent. The news is filled with horrific acts committed by "biological moms and dads" every single day.
14th,
Those that share your proclivity are 40 times more likely to commit horrific acts then are their right minded counterparts. The "Gold Standard" may be just another inconvenient truth to you, but it is worth its weight in...wait for it...GOLD.
Hence the name "Gold Standard."
Randy, it is lies like yours that are going to earn NOM their rightly deserved designation as a hate group. Keep it up! Your proclivity is helping our side more than you know!!!!!!
Thom,
Don't you worry; your side drew first blood and I have never backed down from a fight. It was the blatant and boisterous lies of the marriage corruption movement that dragged me into this fight and I will continue to swing away with the naked truth until well after you have left the stage.
Insult to injury...?
Count on it.
The gay lifestyle is immoral. unhealthy, and destructive. A recent CDC report 2010 declared an epidemic rise of HIV/AIDS among the youth in gay population. STD's are also on the increase with MSM (men having sex with men) for gays and bisexuals.
Thom,
In case you haven't notice we are at war with your kind...We can play this war of words game however you want to play it... NOM has become so important in the marriage fight, the hint or action of your side attempting take NOM out would be catastrophic for your side. All of HELL will break lose. GO TELL YOUR KIND "DON"T MISS WITH NOM". Under attack, we will protect NOM and your side will burn... Just sayin!
Thom, go to bed, then wake up to reality by going back to the closet from once you came. Stay there and never ever let that side of you "comeout" again...
Sigh.......
Craig, please define the gay lifestyle for me. Just curious.
Gay lifestyle= surrender of identity to sexual orientation, and pursuit of public approval of said disorientation.
Leo - So far you guys a very good job of defending yourselves. You have no rational basis for your fight, so your position is indefensible. It is for that reason that you resort to blatant lies while pretending to be good Christians. Lies in the name of God are still lies!
And no, you won't force anybody back into the closet just because you don't like them. You hold no power to do as such and if you think you do, you are more delusional than you already make yourself out to be.
40
What constitutes a "'good' Christian"? "Good," by what standard? Who does the grading? What's passing?
There is only One Who is good.
Whose "rational basis" should we have?
24
Whose "morals" inform you? Should THOSE "morals" inform us, and should we just trash OUR Morals?
"In case you haven't notice we are at war with your kind."
Yes, we know, this was never about marriage.
Thom said "And no, you won't force anybody back into the closet just because you don't like them. You hold no power to do as such and if you think you do, you are more delusional than you already make yourself out to be."
Well, once we win the SS"M" battle, we'll take on reversing Lawrence v. Texas; homosexual acts have only been "legal" for about 9 years; the damage to society since is enough to put it back in the closet as a matter of public policy. We just need one more conservative justice.
Pete: "Yes, we know, this was never about marriage".
Tell us something we don't already know? It has always been by your side, about homosexual acceptance, indoctrination, increasing the numbers, anti-religion, legalizing perversion.
The direction of our nation is disastrous, and the magnitude of this disaster is becoming more apparent by the day.
We have surrendered our government and judicial branches, in large degree, to radicals who hate traditional values and imagine themselves able to impose their contrary values on a supine populace.
The marriage battle is the key to proving them wrong.
correction:
Thom,
In case you haven't notice we are at war with your kind...We can play this war of words game however you want to play it... NOM has become so important in the marriage fight, the hint or action of your side attempting take NOM out would be catastrophic for your side. All of HELL will break loose. GO TELL YOUR KIND "DON"T MESS WITH NOM". Under attack, we will protect NOM and your side will burn... Just sayin!
Thom, go to bed, then wake up to reality by going back to the closet from once you came. Stay there and never ever let that side of you "comeout" again...
Overcame, you’re delusional if you think Law v Texas will ever get reversed. A democratic society won’t stand for it. And Law v Texas reversed sodomy laws in only a dozen or so states, which were the very last to do so. Sodomy laws were repealed in the other states over time going back to before 1970.
Stefan:
Many things are about to change in ways you do not presently see.
Stefan - A democratic society that does not want homosexual sex to be discussed in public and dominating the media airwaves would be happy to have homosexual acts put back where they belong: anywhere you want but in public. This doesn't mean homosexuals will stop committing sodomy; it just means that they will not be allowed to discuss their sodomist acts in public for fear of being arrested, that's all.
One more conservative judge on the Court and a correction by Kennedy is all that's needed to fix this case that inadvertently legalized public displays of sodomy while trying to protect a right to sexual privacy. I can at least see a partial reversal in which the public display of sodomy would be put back in the closet.
@32 That is a pretty strong false statement. Where is your proof of this outlandish accusation?
Similarly, I wonder how many bots signed for Starbucks.....
Doesn't really matter.
Bots don't vote.
@54 - Overcame: Lawrence was about two men having sex in the privacy of their home.
54
Except that they can't have sex. They masturbate.
Stefan: You are not up to date regarding the video of Starbuck's shareholders. Applause is indicative of what? There was also applause for the opposition, right in the face of the executive. Some shareholders who don't think it is a good business idea to support same-sex marriage as a core principle don't want the shares to go down. They want to sell their shares before the price per share goes down. So they are not going to clap (applause) at the wrong time. They will be selling their shares when they start to dip in price. Shareholders are not stupid.
Hate is not only not a family value but is not x-tian either. Why do you continue to do boycott places it doesn't work for you....it makes you look foolish
Hate is also not an adequate characterization of that which motivates the vast majority of the American electorate to desire to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman, Wyo.
We have never much cared about how we "looked".
We care about standing for the truth about marriage, and happily enough our fellow citizens overwhelmingly have demonstrated that they agree with us.