NOM BLOG

Sign the Petition! NOM Announces Protest of General Mills

 

Email Header Image

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Just a few months ago, Starbucks announced that gay marriage was "core" to the beliefs of their company and formally endorsed same-sex marriage in Washington State. NOM responded by organizing a protest of Starbucks—and nearly 45,000 people have now signed the DumpStarbucks petition.

Well, the radical left of corporate America is at it again...and this time it's General Mills. If you had a hard time figuring out what coffee has to do with gay marriage, good luck figuring out what the connection is with breakfast cereals. But for whatever reason, General Mills has entered the Culture War, announcing its corporate opposition to the marriage amendment in Minnesota on the ballot this November which would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Supporter, this is extremely serious! We cannot allow Corporate America throw its weight behind the gay marriage movement!

Please take 60 seconds to sign our petition to let General Mills know that backing gay marriage is just bad business!

The DumpStarbucks.com petition helped begin a movement that is sending a powerful message to corporate America: Don't Mess With Marriage!

Apparently, General Mills missed that message. So, please, send it to them right now so there can be no uncertainty. Go sign our petition asking General Mills to reconsider their ill-advised decision to back the same-sex marriage movement.

We need you now more than ever as we are reaching a "line in the sand" moment—we cannot allow corporate America to throw its prestige, influence, power and money behind same-sex marriage.

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.

67 Comments

  1. Posted June 25, 2012 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    CEREALISM
    “Here’s a great idea, what do you think:
    The Trix Rabbit ‘comes out’ with a wink,
    While Count Chocula warms
    To the Leprechaun’s charms
    And the Jolly Green Giant wears pink?”

  2. Posted June 25, 2012 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    Supporting gay marriage is very bad for business, I urge you to please reconsider the support you have taken to give to the gay marriage movement!!!

  3. Ginny Espinoza
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

    That does it!! Et tu, Brutus???? No more General Mills Cereals for this family!!

  4. Sheila K McKenna
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Corporations should be donating to things that actually help people. Like Children's hospitals and therapy units. Not things that have no meaning.

  5. Peter Thomas
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    Wow, if you people don't stop "dumping" companies you are gonne soon be starving and naked.

  6. Carol Puma
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 7:49 pm | Permalink

    Our world has become a confusing enough place as it is, not only for us as adults, but for our children as well. Marriage between a man and a woman is the foundation of our society. Family is the foundation of our society. Marriage is for the purpose of pro-creation, and that takes one man & one woman. We need to respect all people, gay or straight, but don't mess with marriage please.

  7. Lefty
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

    "Well, the radical left of corporate America is at it again...and this time it's General Mills."

    If you keep boycotting all these different brands, eventually you will end up boycotting capitalism itself. Then you will be on the radical left.

  8. Zack
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    @Lefty

    Well it's name brand. Boycotting namebrand products isn't anti-capitalism.

    That being said, I can't remember the last time I've had general mills because namebrand products are too expensive compared to the store or generic brand.

  9. MrRoivas
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    One wonders when Nom will start boycotting both Apple and Microsoft, given both support gay rights.

    Of course, that would make it hard to use computers in their crusade. But I'm confidant such principled people are willing to make sacrifices.

  10. Zack
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

    @MrRoivas

    Well it's a matter of picking and choosing battles. In the case of Microsoft, everyone knows that Bill Gates is a far left liberal who supports the Democratic Party. Same goes for Apple, so to see these corporations endorse political positions-while hypocritical when you liberals fail to condemn them-is no surprise. With companies like General Mills which has been around since before my grandparents were born, it's disheartening to see such a household name deface itself like that.

    Corporations should stay out of politics

  11. Shawn
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    pretty soon you won't be able to buy anything since corporate america is coming around to our side

  12. Rick
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

    Zack...your are going to boycott a product you don't use? Priceless! :)

  13. Posted June 25, 2012 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

    Well, I guess Kellog's and Quaker and the other cereal people are going to get more of my business.
    No more GM for us!!

  14. Posted June 25, 2012 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

    Whoops! Better put Kraft/Nabisco on the list too! Do you guys have to take notebooks with you to the grocery store? No more nomnomnom Oreos for NOM!

    http://www.towleroad.com/2012/06/oreo-cookies-go-rainbow-for-gay-pride-photo.html

  15. Skooter McGoo
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

    @Zack Citizens United insures that corporations are people and will always be in politics.

  16. Randy E King
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 11:58 pm | Permalink

    Corporations should be vocal in their politics so we will know who they are and what the stand for.

  17. Helen Bloodsworth
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 12:17 am | Permalink

    No More General Mills for my Family.

  18. Posted June 26, 2012 at 12:43 am | Permalink

    FR:

    Brilliant! Hilarious, I loved it.

  19. Posted June 26, 2012 at 12:48 am | Permalink

    By the way- the NOM boycotts are very, very important and powerful interventions, which is exactly why our opposition (Alinskyites) employ sarcasm and derision against them.

    Of course, are already biting (and how much more to come!- see the disastrous failure of "gay marketing" for JC Penney).

    Build the ground game, slowly, steadily, every single day between now and November.

    Just as we have always done, since Prop 8.

    That's exactly how we win.

  20. LEO
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 2:29 am | Permalink

    To all you SSM supporters, there is a difference when companies offer benefits to SSU employees as wells as other trivial SSU sponsorship, and those companies funding to destory the definition marriage. We will pick and choose our battles carefully... As for Microsoft, the last time I checked, hey don't sell computers but software, and for myself, I've been boycott Microsoft for more then 10 years now.

  21. LEO
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 2:34 am | Permalink

    SSM supporters:
    So, in other words, 95% of US businesses do not support, nor participate in funding the SSM campaign.

  22. MBOHOH
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 3:18 am | Permalink

    In principle, NOM should boycott Apple and Microsoft, but that will drastically reduce their capability to broadcast their messages. Wonder what will NOM do if their web hosting service provider decides to support marriage for all. Boycotting is one thing. NOM needs to lead by example, stand up to their principles and impose on their values and beliefs when they draw out their business contracts. Another victim card awaits NOM if they succeed showing that their businesses are actually affected by the lack of religious freedom because of their beliefs. But truly the line between freedom of expression and imposition is really distinctive. If there is even some goodness in this charade...

  23. Posted June 26, 2012 at 8:41 am | Permalink

    Gee...MOST major corporations voice their support for a conservative, healthy legal commitment between two individuals where many of them are emloyed by them. Let's put a stop to THAT! (LOL!!)

  24. David in Houston
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    Nabisco just supported the gay community with a Pride Oreo cookie. At what point do you declare war on companies that won't pretend that gay people are nonexistent and don't deserve equality in our society?

  25. dn
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    When a gay playwright asks that a playhouse in sacramento stop performing his works (which are his copyrighted property), you guys flipped out.

    But when you do the exact same thing, you're what, noble heroes?

    I fully support your right to boycott. But I'm going to call you out for your hypocrisy.

  26. Randy E King
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    Davids,

    Smoker's, Drinkers, Sun Bathers, and Rock Climbers exist as well, but that does not mean we should change the meaning of words just so they can feel better about their proclivity.

  27. Layne
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:28 am | Permalink

    "I never thought that by eating Cheerios for breakfast I would be supporting gay marriage." -- I literally spit my coffee out reading that. That and the line about "my conscience is going to win out over the desire for another bowl of Lucky Charms." OMG!

    I swear if I didn't know any better I'd think your site was hacked by Colbert's people. Because that's the funniest boycott mission statement I've ever read in my life.

    Ahhh NOM. You make us gays miserable but you sure do give us a good laugh every now and then. This is right up there with the time you did your summer bus tour and were drawing crowds of tens, but later took an image of a thousands-strong Obama rally, cropped out Barry, and put the NOM logo over top of it. LOL!

  28. Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    Randy King, being gay isn't a "proclivity." A person can be gay and have never procleeved! But by your verbiage, you betray that your problem isn't gay marriage, but gays period.

  29. LEO
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    To all you SSM supporters, there is a difference when companies offer benefits to SSU employees as wells as other trivial SSU sponsorship, and those companies funding to destry the definition marriage. We will pick and choose our battles carefully... As for Microsoft, the last time I checked, they don't sell computers but software, and for myself, I've been boycotting Microsoft for more then 10 years now.
    ALL WE NEED IS FOR A FEW BIG BUSINESSES TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS FOR THEIR CONTINUE SUPPORT FOR SSM, THE REST WILL FOLLOW SUIT OR EVOLVE TO STOPPING THEIR SUPPORT.

  30. Paul Cook-Giles
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    LEO, as MrRoivas told you way back up in Comment#9, Apple is also a supporter of civil marriage equality (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/10/24/apple_gives_100000_to_fight_california_gay_marriage_ban.html). You're pushing a loosing proposition, that gay people don't have the same rights that straight people do. And --just like your predecessors who lost the fights to preserve traditional slavery, traditionally voteless women, traditional racial segregation for marriages, traditional apartheid, and traditionally racially separate schools-- soon civil-marriage-for-straight-people-only will be a thing of the past. (Cheer up, though... your church will still be able to refuse to marry gay people. :) )

  31. Posted June 26, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    Now Paul, here is the thing.

    We have defeated pseudo-marriage 33 consecutive times,
    To conclude from this that we were pushing a losing proposition, is almost as illogical as as concluding that wives are not females, or husbands are not males.

    Because the pseudo-marriage worldview is immune to reality, we are able to defeat it, despite the echo chamber of corporate media.

    See you in November.

  32. Posted June 26, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Now Paul, here is the thing.

    We have defeated pseudo-marriage 33 consecutive times,

    To conclude from this that we were pushing a losing proposition, is almost as illogical as as concluding that wives are not females, or husbands are not males.

    Because the pseudo-marriage worldview is immune to reality, we are able to defeat it, despite the echo chamber of corporate media.

    See you in November.

  33. dbwheeler
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    PS, anyone who says homosexuals do not have the same rights is insane. It isn't about rights, but morality! You don't have that privilege of rewriting God's law and the natural moral law. The problem with narcissistic elitists is they think they're ABOVE the law, and ABOVE the rest of us...and present themselves as victims. Sick.

  34. Posted June 26, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    DB, so I'm immoral just by drawing breath? Because I've been in a monogomous relationship for 14 years, and legally married for 4? How is that immoral? And "God's law" is--or should be--utterly irrelevent to civil law.

  35. leviticus
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    So called SS"m" is a lie. You cannot make a heavenly silk puse out of a dirty sow's ear.

  36. Posted June 26, 2012 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

    I have said this many times that Americans celebrates family reunion every year from time being. This I̶̲̥̅̊S̤̥̈̊ because they strongly believe and respect what G̶̲̥̅Ơ̴̴̴̴͡.̮Ơ̴̴̴͡D̶̲̥̅ marriage and happy family I̶̲̥̅̊S̤̥̈̊ all about. Now destroying the beauty, I̶̲̥̅̊S̤̥̈̊ very sad that the Americans that has always bn models I̶̲̥̅̊S̤̥̈̊ becoming a big problems to the entire world.
    Please, let's stand against same sex marriage. Pull down every satanic endorsements. Prayerfully disgrace the works ☀̤̣̈̇f darkness destroying the union called marriages between man and woman.
    The Almighty God shall hear our calls, i̶̲̥̅̊n̶̲̥̅̊ Jesus' name.

  37. Luke
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    I love how the left has a crush on us, always stalking our posts and "creeping" on our walls

  38. Paul Cook-Giles
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    Rick, thanks for making sure I know the history of the votes on civil marriage equality. :) I'd like to be sure that you know that all the major civil rights advances made by the US over the last century or so were made not at the ballot box, but at the bar of justice or on the battlefield. The abolition of slavery, women's sufferage, desegregation of public facilities, desegregation of schools... none of these had popular support when they came into being. You should also know that polls broken down by age banding show overwhelming support for marriage equality in the 30-and-under band. It may not come tomorrow, or next year, but it will come.

    And DBWheeler... if you make your religious group's doctrine into civil law, you are liable to be subject to some other group's doctrine that gets put into civil law. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Do you really want to let somebody else decide what religious laws you're going to be subject to?

  39. Pookie
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

    Please reconsider your decision General Mills.When company's refrain from staying neutral in cultural hot button issues, they will ALWAYS ostracize one group of people. As a long time supporter, I am one of the 'many' you have ostracized with the decision you have made to advocate for Gay rights/ SSM. As another poster said, why not offer your name and $$ to feeding dying children in third world countries.,helping the homeless in our country, stopping abuse? You have made an extremely poor decision. The boycott has begun, It will not only be bad for sales, but for your long standing reputation. Shame on General Mills.

  40. leviticus
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

    Paul, but the will of the people usually prevails, just take a look at Iowa, where the SS"m" bar of justice was swiftly replaced by a steel toed boot out the door.

  41. Austin
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

    @leviticus

    Yet, gay marriage is still legal in Iowa.

  42. Paul Cook-Giles
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

    Leviticus, "...weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning." No one expects to correct a wrong that has persisted for many, many years overnight. And no one expects that our progress will be effected with some backward steps. But gay and lesbian Americans have made tremendous strides in the last fifty or so years, and we expect to make many more in the next fifty. Or hundred and fifty. And you will still be free to stand in your church (or where-ever) and proclaim that gay people are by their very nature intrinsically disordered, and that we're all going to hell, along with the people who eat bacon and wear blended fibers and shave and get tattooed and work on Saturday. And we'll continue to defend your right to proclaim your truth as you see it. But you will no longer be able to deny us our place at the American table.

  43. Paul Cook-Giles
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

    I meant to say "And no one expects that our progress will be unaffected by some backward steps." Sorry!

  44. Good News
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    @Paul Cook-Giles
    I never heard that people who eat bacon or those who wear blended fibers, or those who shave, or those who get tattooed, or those people who work on Saturday were going to go to hell – but homosexuals, yes. But I'm not a biblical or religious expert as you seem to be.
    But anyway leaving that religious stuff aside, we can agree that in 150 years there will be homosexuals among the society. And we can agree that there will also be the man-woman life long unions (biological families or symbol of), and that it would be unjust, unkind, or simply put, hateful on that day as it is today that the society disallow the naming of that union by a unique word. And stealing away the word that did exist for that purpose – is just not nice. Not nice at all (i.e. hateful, or otherwise stated its revenge for revenge sake). We will continue to defend our right to have a unique word to name the man-woman union.

  45. grandmaliberty
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

    I'll vote against SSM if necessary, why there is even an argument when DOMA is already the law of the land I don't know... but for the arguments on line, I have decided to leave it to God... He is the ultimate judge after all...

  46. Paul Cook-Giles
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 6:41 pm | Permalink

    Good News, those people are all violators of commandments in the pages of the Jewish or the Christian bibles. I mentioned them simply as examples of other groups that might be subject to civil penalties if Scripture is made into civil law... not because I believe they're going to Hell. :)

    We can agree there will be gay and lesbian people 150 years from now. Our disagreement lies in the fact that we use the same word, "marriage," to describe two very different things: a civil contract and a religious covenant. If those who are so protective of the latter meaning had supported a new term for the civil contract, and encouraged their legislators to replace "marriage" with that new term, and had used that term to describe people, regardless of their gender, who had a civil union, we probably wouldn't be having this disagreement now.

    But you didn't. And the same loud voices that are "defending traditional marriage" today are the ones that were raised in protest against domestic partnerships and civil unions yesterday.

    No one is trying to force religious organizations to change their requirements for performing marriages. No one is clamoring for Roman Catholics to marry divorced people. No one is yelling for Rabbis to marry Jews to Gentiles. No one is telling Latter Day Saints that they can't seal multiple women to a single man in Temple ceremonies. But we are demanding the same protections of the civil law that have been extended to straight people.

  47. Publius
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

    @ Paul

    "we use the same word, "marriage," to describe two very different things: a civil contract and a religious covenant."

    The disagreement is not over whether marriage is a religious or civil institution. It can be both with different definitions, parameters, and spheres for each.

    The disagreement is over whether civil marriage legally should mean the union of a man and a woman as traditionally defined in English Common Law and American law or something else. That something else to Judge Walker means an economic union with “feelings.” I have argued elsewhere on this blog that contract law is appropriate for economic unions (with or without feelings) and that family law as traditionally formulated can uniquely protect women and children in ways that a de-gendered family law or contract law cannot.

    I see no reason why General Mills should have a corporate policy to undermine a foundation of English Common Law.

    See also Baker v. Nelson re equal protection.

    Civil unions are available to all in Illinois, and there is still an ill-advised movement to de-gender marriage in Illinois. Civil unions are a compromise that gays weren't happy with in Vermont.

  48. Emily
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    Are you guys going to boycott Kraft (or at least Nabisco) since they published an advert wishing "Happy Pride"?

    I'm serious. Are you guys going to take a stand against it at all?

  49. Randy E King
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

    @Paul,

    There is no-such-thing as a "gay" and "lesbian" people; so we cannot agree that there will always be that which never was; these miscreants are not a species unto themselves.

    Equating what you do with who you are is the calling card of an elitist mentality.

  50. Old Redneck
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

    Were all you people born stupid or did you get that way after becoming christians??

  51. Shawn
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:13 pm | Permalink

    Randy, you're right, gays and lesbians aren't a species unto themselves, they are human beings just like you.

  52. Leo
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

    Emily, I would hope so and thank you for the info!

  53. Leo
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

    Emily, I will not support ANY company that intentionally ellienate their employees and customers by supportng gay rights for political and financial purposes, even if it means doing without certain products or services. We are at WAR with the LGBT group, we must realize this now before it is to late to fight back.... We did not start the culture War but we must end it on our terms, and sooner then later. Buckle up, get involved, and do the right thing to protect marriage and our children and their future children for a stable society.
    BE NOT AFRAID but STAND YOUR GROUND... MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU ALWAYS, LOL!

  54. Leo
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:49 pm | Permalink

    sorry, aliennate is what wanted to say in my last post...

  55. Leo
    Posted June 26, 2012 at 10:49 pm | Permalink

    Wow, I did it again, lol!

  56. Tugs N McCowan
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 2:31 am | Permalink

    I can not believe these right wing bigots.
    America is doomed by these wackos. They are the fetters to development.

  57. Zack
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 3:05 am | Permalink

    @Rick

    "your are going to boycott a product you don't use? Priceless!"

    A rather ignorant response. I can't afford it so I won't buy it. Hardly a boycott.

    Think before you type on your keyboard next time.

  58. Lady Mabeline
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 3:57 am | Permalink

    you nomers are freaks

  59. M. Jones
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 4:27 am | Permalink

    An economic union with feelings otherwise known as a same-sex friendship is not a marriage, plain and simple.

  60. Randy E King
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    @Shawn,

    Changing the meaning of words so as to lend an appearance of acceptability to your depravity only serves to prove that you yourself know your perversion is indefensible on its own merits.

  61. GZeus
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    M. Jones: "An economic union with feelings otherwise known as a same-sex friendship is not a marriage" Huh?? How are they the same? My same-sex friendship with my best friend is not an economic or sexual union. I don't financially support him, or share a mortgage or split the cable bill. And we definitely do not have sex. What a silly statement.

  62. JamesF
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    Allstate
    Amazon
    American Airlines
    Apple
    Applebee's
    Best Buy
    Clorox
    Coca-Cola
    Costco
    Delta Airlines
    Ford
    Gap
    General Motors
    Gerber Baby Products
    Hilton Hotels
    Home Depot
    IMB
    Levi's
    Marriot International
    McDonald's
    Microsoft
    Nationwide
    Nike
    Olive Garden
    Pepsico
    Proctor and Gamble
    Red Lobster
    Rite Aid
    Sears
    Southwest Airlines
    Starbucks
    State Farm
    Target
    United Airlines
    UPS
    Walgreens
    All supporting of gay rights, and that's just a few. How many more before you realise you're on the wrong side of history?
    Boycott them all. I dare you.

  63. Publius
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    There is a difference between providing benefits to gay employees and customers and making the legal redefinition (de-gendering) of marriage a corporate objective. The former does not concern me. The latter is a piece of political activism that attempts to legally redefine everyone's marriage and affects all of family law. That does concern me.

    How many of the above corporations have made legally redefining (de-gendering) marriage as a core corporate objective?

  64. RoodAwakening
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for the list, JamesF. That's actually quite helpful!

    I'm surprised about Marriott, though, given that it's a Mormon-owned corporation.

  65. Leo
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    @ Publuis, concur

    I said it prior way above, of course you articulated better:

    @ 29,to all you SSM supporters, there is a (big) difference when companies offer benefits to SSU employees (or supportting just unions as other trivial SSU sponsorship), and those companies funding the opposition to destroy the definition marriage. We will pick and choose our battles carefully... As for Microsoft, the last time I checked, they don't sell computers but software, and I have been boycotting the company for more then 10 years now.
    ALL WE NEED IS FOR A FEW OF THOSE SPONSORS TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS THEIR CONTINUE SUPPORT FOR SSM OR CHANGE THEIR COURSE TO NEUTRAL, THE REST WILL FOLLOW SUIT OR EVOLVE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY.

  66. Leo
    Posted June 27, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    James F,
    Now provide us with an "actual" list of companies who are participating in redefining marriage.
    But for the record I disagree with any company supporting homosexuality and would not directly, with the foreknowledge, support their business, period.

  67. Sean
    Posted June 30, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    "The DumpStarbucks.com petition helped begin a movement that is sending a powerful message to corporate America: Don't Mess With Marriage!"

    Err I'm confused, last I checked Starbucks still has continued to support Same-Sex Marriage, and the Dump Marriage campaign only has 45,280 supporters...yup that's sure going to send those corporate haters of marriage a message...a message that anything NOM does has absolutely no real power. Just lies and insanity. I find it hilarious they even think General Mills will lose much revenue if around the same amount start dumping their product. Besides, you're still providing revenue when you purchase one to dump it. Get a new idea NOM, because these are just getting old.