[Lucky Dog]

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.”

…Of course, this doesn't explain why Wal*Mart doesn't just ignore the issue entirely.

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.

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

If I might, let me recap the argument:

WalMart publicly announced a policy supporting homosexual practitioners. Some people objected. I pointed out that silence from corporate entities on this issue is the wisest business position in that such a position offends no one, i.e., stockholders, customers, employees, etc.

You initially disagreed, but after reconsideration, now agree. Debate concluded, correct?

[megatherium]

You initially disagreed, but after reconsideration, now agree. Debate concluded, correct?

Yep. I think we do agree that a corporation should take no position on this issue, nor should it be involved in its employees' private lives.