Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Corporate America backs gay rights (Mega Barf Alert!)
CNNMoney.com ^ | April 26, 2006 | Marc Gunther

Posted on 04/26/2006 12:59:56 PM PDT by DBeers

Corporate America backs gay rights


Plugged In: Gay rights are good business, no matter the politics.

NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - This spring, shareholders at such big companies as ExxonMobil , Ford and American Express are voting on whether gay and lesbian people deserve protection against discrimination in the workplace.

But even as battles over gay rights flare up in the corporate world, there's no doubt about who's winning the war.

More than 80 percent of companies in the Fortune 500 now ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Some 249 of the Fortune 500 offer health and other benefits to the same-sex partners of their employees. That's up from just 28 a decade ago.

Last year, Wal-Mart , America's biggest employer, agreed to support a network for its gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) workers, joining such firms as Citigroup , DuPont and IBM . All these trends are moving in one direction - towards more rights for gay and lesbian people.

This is remarkable, given the setbacks that gay rights have taken in the political arena, especially around the issue of gay marriage.

"Corporate America is ahead of government in providing equal treatment for GLBT people because it knows that fairness is good for business," declares Joe Solmonese, president of Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay and lesbian civil rights group.

For the past four years, the Human Rights Campaign has ranked big companies on gay rights issues. It looks at non-discrimination policies, domestic partner benefits, advertising in gay media, philanthropy and support for gay employee groups. This year, 101 companies received the highest possible 100 percent rating - up from 56 last year and 13 when the survey was first done in 2002.

~SNIP~

(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: disgustingperverts; fags; filthyperverts; homosexualagenda; perverts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: DBeers

You can add LOWES building supply to this list.


21 posted on 04/26/2006 2:02:59 PM PDT by buck61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

It's about pressure and threats of expensive lawsuits.


22 posted on 04/26/2006 2:18:51 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Robertson
Who's going to protect me in the workplace when a gay HR director and/or two gay co-workers in my department decide I'm uncool because I'm a "breeder"?

Based on what I've seen when homosexuals get into positions where they are responsible for hiring, I don't think a guy like you has to worry about getting hired in the first place. They tend to hire those who are either homosexuals themselves or are simpering toadies of the homosexual culture.
23 posted on 04/26/2006 2:25:28 PM PDT by Antoninus (I will not vote for a liberal, regardless of party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
"All these trends are moving in one direction - towards more special rights for gay and lesbian people."
24 posted on 04/26/2006 4:04:48 PM PDT by Texas_Jarhead (Say NO! to "No Illegal Alien Left Behind" legislation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: DBeers
I'm all for equal rights for gays and lesbians when it comes to employment and housing.

However when they start pushing gay marriage, teaching homosexuality is "normal" in grade schools, and defining religious beliefs as "hate speech", I draw the line.

26 posted on 04/26/2006 5:55:00 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henry195
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/search?m=any;o=score;s=homosexual%20agenda
27 posted on 04/26/2006 6:14:20 PM PDT by Texas_Jarhead (Say NO! to "No Illegal Alien Left Behind" legislation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=homosexual+agenda
28 posted on 04/26/2006 6:15:28 PM PDT by Texas_Jarhead (Say NO! to "No Illegal Alien Left Behind" legislation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Henry195
What is the homosexual agenda? Please explain it to me.

Click & Read...

Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search

If you oppose the homosexualization of society
-add yourself to the ping list!

To be included in or removed from the
HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA PING LIST,
please FReepMail either DBeers or DirtyHarryY2k.

29 posted on 04/26/2006 6:18:33 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: Jorge
I'm all for equal rights for gays and lesbians when it comes to employment and housing.

Equal Rights sounds nice; however, it is a moral relative term subjectively and situationally derived. The ambiguousness inherent to the term leaves it open to manipulation e.g. blurring reality by intentionally confusing that which is innately human with the sexual activity that a human being is predisposed to or chooses to engage in...

What makes an individual human is not what they do or do not do -the unalienable God-given rights inherent individuals derive from simply being alive... It is extra or special rights or privileges premised in activities that are being sought by homosexual activists . Rights beyond those that derive from the unalienable.

One must maintain separate innate humanity with human activity to be able to effectively and legitimately confront and oppose those that push for the homosexualization of society.

Only by avoiding the ambiguous -maintaning distinct that which entails human activity from that which entails human being can the questions be legitimately discerned and legitimately answered (something that terms like "equal rights" do not facilitate).

Some specific questions:

1. Does homosexual sex merit extra or special rights or privileges e.g. "partner" tax breaks, "partner" health care?

2. Do those that are predisposed to or choose to engage in homosexual sex merit "non discrimination" e.g. should male homosexuals be Boy Scout leaders -should homosexuals be allowed in the Military?

To effectively oppose the homosexualization of society e.g. oppose those that push homosexual marriage, teach homosexuality is "normal" in grade schools, and define religious beliefs as "hate speech" one has to diligently maintain separate that which entails human activity from that which entails human being to even be at the point where one can clearly address both issues inherent to the discussion e.g.:

Being for Human Rights -unalienable; e.g. all individuals as Human Beings merit respect and dignity is clear...

Being for just discrimination based upon activity is clear...

Being opposed to an unhealthy activity such as homosexual sex is clear...

Being against any extra or special rights or privileges because one feels predisposed to or chooses to engage in homosexual activity is clear...

Again, "Equal Rights" is unclear and ambiguous (wonder why the left uses the term?)

LOL

/put away soap box

:-)

32 posted on 04/26/2006 9:14:58 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DBeers

If equal rights of tax breaks, health care etc were to be given to homosexual couples, then they should logically apply to anyone who chose to refer to themselves as a 'unit'.
This would mean that brothers who choose to live together, or a mother and daughter, a couple of close friends who live together, or any unmarried couple in any form of relationship who decide that they'd like to share domestic responsibilities with each other should be allowed the same rights.

This raises other questions, I guess, but to offer 'rights' only to homos, while not offering the same to any other domestic 'unit' simply doesn't make sense. To put one form of relationship above any other, because it is a sexually perverted relationship...??... errr... I don't follow that logic.

I live with my 'soulmate' (both of us celibate), but I'd never expect our relationship to be treated on equal terms to a married couple.

Anyone can SAY they are a couple.


33 posted on 04/27/2006 2:37:35 AM PDT by mikeyc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

ha we should be happy that corp america is scamming gays out of their money


34 posted on 04/27/2006 2:39:43 AM PDT by KneelBeforeZod (I have five dollars for each of you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mikeyc
Anyone can SAY they are a couple.

Exactly!

35 posted on 04/27/2006 8:16:08 AM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
Equal Rights sounds nice; however, it is a moral relative term subjectively and situationally derived.

That's why I specified that I am for equal rights when it comes to employment and housing..because I don't hate gays or desire they suffer injustices.

However I don't define forcing us to accept "gay marriage" or being made to adopt politically correct beliefs that contradict our religious and moral convictions to be covered under "rights" either.

36 posted on 04/27/2006 3:33:28 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
I understood the totality of your position -- I was just using a portion of your post as a springboard to expound upon...

:-)

37 posted on 04/27/2006 3:36:49 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
I was just using a portion of your post as a springboard to expound upon...

Yes, and you are correct. "Equal rights" is a term that is clearly distorted and misapplied by the left and the gay lobby....... ultimately to intrude on the rights of ALL those who disagree with them.

We just can't give them ownership of the phrase.

38 posted on 04/28/2006 6:07:38 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jorge

:-)


39 posted on 04/28/2006 6:24:20 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...


40 posted on 04/30/2006 8:08:23 PM PDT by Coleus (I Support Research using the Ethical, Effective and Moral use of stem cells: non-embryonic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson