Replies

Silence on this issue retains the good will of the population that views homosexual behavior as undesirable without antagonizing homosexual practitioners and their supporters. Therefore, it would seem the smart business move for stockholders, customers, employees and everyone else would be “no comment.”

… the gay community isn't that small, only 2% of the population self-identifies as gay on surveys but the real numbers are somewhat bigger. (4% wouldn't surprise me.)

Let’s see… your own figures mean that 96 percent, or more, of the population is not homosexual. Other sources claim that over 80 percent of the population is Christian. Christianity holds that homosexual behavior is sinful and should be avoided. Therefore, even if only half of those who are identified as Christian sincerely hold those beliefs, the proportion of the population that takes offense at homosexual agenda support from a major corporation is many times greater than the proportion you cite as homosexual. Therefore, the logic of my statement continues to stand unrefuted.

More importantly, there are a lot of people who find they have a gay relative or an old friend who turns out to be gay, or gay colleagues. They realize that gays are ordinary people and are no threat to them. So there are plenty of straight people who are sympathetic to gay people now.

Unfortunately, I have a relative who claims to be a lesbian. Such does not make me sympathetic to her in any sense other than sincere regret for her choice and earnest hope for her reform. There is no reason to assume that the majority of others who have a relative in similar circumstances view the situation any differently.

But the other reason these companies cater to the gay lobby is that if you want to recruit technical and creative talent for your company, you'd best not be allergic to gay people.

Again, let’s examine the question raised by the logical implication of your statement. Are you claiming that the distribution of “technical and creative talent” is some how restricted to the homosexual segment of the population? Perhaps, you are implying that there is not an adequate distribution of “technical and creative talent” among those individuals who are not homosexual?

Assuming that “technical and creative talent” follows a Gaussian distribution in the population (as do nearly all other traits), then there is no reason to assume that even if a company actively refused to hire homosexual practitioners, they would exclude more than 2 percent of the potentially available pool of “technical and creative talent.” Stating that position in the reverse, these companies would still have access to 98 percent of the available pool of qualified resources.

And the ones who are straight that you've already hired might be very sympathetic to gay people, and would bolt if you transmitted the message that gay people are not welcome at your firm or might be poorly treated at your firm.

Conversely, those who are straight that you have already hired might be very offended and might bolt if you transmit the message that you support the homosexual agenda… to wit, the individual cited in the article posted at the beginning of this thread.

I'm a math professor, so I know a lot of these kind of people. The academic culture at even small red state schools is now very pro-gay, if you are uncomfortable around gay people you're going to be an unhappy camper.

I served as adjunct faculty for both graduate and undergraduate courses in engineering, forensics and simulation (a field, no doubt, with which you are familiar) at two different universities for a number of years. Amazingly enough, I do not ever recall asking any of my fellow instructors, my students, or the organization administrators about their sexual preference, nor do I recall them volunteering such information. It would seem that silence concerning such personal items was not only appropriate etiquette, but was also conducive to good working relationships. Why would the situation be any different for good business relationships?

It doesn't bother me. My point being that the technical and creative people come from the university environments, and share the same culture.

I don’t think you realize how insulting and condescending your comments appear. No technical and creative people come from other sources than university environments? All of those who come from university environment have the same opinion concerning homosexual practitioners? Because you do not have a problem with this issue, no one should?

Now I have time to respond to your post properly.

Other sources claim that over 80 percent of the population is Christian. Christianity holds that homosexual behavior is sinful and should be avoided. This is a bit of a stretch. That is, I wouldn't be surprised if 80% self-identify as Christian, but only 40% or so go to church weekly. And many (liberal) Christians no longer believe that homosexuality is always sinful. Therefore, even if only half of those who are identified as Christian sincerely hold those beliefs, the proportion of the population that takes offense at homosexual agenda support from a major corporation is many times greater than the proportion you cite as homosexual. Logically, this is correct. But it's not just homosexuals that might be offended by an anti-gay policy. It's the 30-40% of the population that is distinctly liberal that would be offended. (Of course, this doesn't explain why Wal*Mart doesn't just ignore the issue entirely.)

I have a relative who claims to be a lesbian. Such does not make me sympathetic to her in any sense other than sincere regret for her choice and earnest hope for her reform. There is no reason to assume that the majority of others who have a relative in similar circumstances view the situation any differently. Naturally, not everyone has the same reaction to gay relatives, friends or colleagues that I have. Or you have. But public attitudes about gay people, particularly young people, have changed in the last decade or two. (Sorry, I don't have the numbers at hand, but the change is significant.)

Stating that position in the reverse, these companies would still have access to 98 percent of the available pool of qualified resources. True, I'll cede that point.

Conversely, those who are straight that you have already hired might be very offended and might bolt if you transmit the message that you support the homosexual agenda… to wit, the individual cited in the article posted at the beginning of this thread. Again true; but in the software/IT field, there's a strong libertarian or tolerant ethic. (My experience, at least.)

Amazingly enough, I do not ever recall asking any of my fellow instructors, my students, or the organization administrators about their sexual preference, nor do I recall them volunteering such information. No one volunteers such information until you start to deal with your colleagues on a social basis (probably more likely for resident faculty than for adjunct faculty). E.g., you receive an invitation to attend a Christmas open house from a gay couple one of whom is a colleague of yours. Colleges are often like small towns, people gossip, and you end up making friendships and drinking beer with your colleagues. It would seem that silence concerning such personal items was not only appropriate etiquette, but was also conducive to good working relationships. Can't argue with that.

I don’t think you realize how insulting and condescending your comments appear. No technical and creative people come from other sources than university environments? Oh my gosh, I didn't mean to say that. What I meant is that software people and the like tend to come from universities. But it's true that not all these folks come from university environments, one of my closest friends is a software engineer who is essentially self-taught, he's very talented. All of those who come from university environment have the same opinion concerning homosexual practitioners? Because you do not have a problem with this issue, no one should? Of course not everyone from my environment agrees with me, not everyone does not have a problem with the issue. But I do hope people will come around to my point of view. . .

I hope this clarifies my perspective. Thank you for taking the trouble to respond to my original post in such detail.