Shop More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
November 12, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 52

NOM To Blackmail Equality-Supporting Companies By Stoking Middle East Anti-Gay Persecution

:icondkalban:
Dkalban Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) plans to expand its campaign to stoke homophobia abroad to undermine pro-equality American companies, according to audio of a conference call obtained by The American Independent. When asked during the call about Starbucks, which had spoken out against anti-gay ballot referenda, NOM President Brian Brown suggested his organization planned to intensify its campaign against Starbucks and other similar companies in countries where homophobia is pervasive:

Their international outreach is where we can have the most effect…So for example, in Qatar, in the Middle East, we’ve begun working to make sure that there’s some price to be paid for this. These are not countries that look kindly on same-sex marriage. And this is where Starbucks wants to expand, as well as India. So we have done some of this; we’ve got to do a lot more.

This strategy is incredibly irresponsible: by associating Starbucks with gay rights in homophobic countries, NOM is singling out Starbucks employees for anti-gay abuse and more generally stoking anger towards LGBT people. The broader Middle East is home to three out of the five countries in the world where homosexuality is punishable by death. Though Qatar specifically isn’t one of them, its government defends other countries’ right to execute LGBT persons and, according to the State Department, “there was an underlying pattern of discrimination towards LGBT persons based on conservative cultural and religious values prevalent in the society.” The situation in India, the other country NOM singled out, is also dire:

The majority of Indian homosexuals – many of whom still live with the parents – refer to their partners as “friends” for fear of being disowned by their families. Many are forcibly married off, trapped in a cycle of pretence and deception and facing social ridicule if they attempted to come out. And those who can live together do not advertise their sexuality, for fear of being evicted by landlords or preyed upon by the corrupt police who extort money from them on threat of exposure.

Under these circumstances, attempting to associate Starbucks with LGBT causes with said causes is doubly irresponsible. NOM is exposing employees to risk they did not voluntarily take on and potentially undermining the quest for the most basic of equal rights by painting LGBT rights as something foreign imposed by a Western company. That NOM is willing to take these chances with others’ lives and livelihoods — to “pay the price,” in Brown’s words — in an attempt to indirectly (and so far, unsucessfully) influence politics inside the United States speaks volumes about the organization.

Why haven't we persecuted this organization for being a hate group yet?

I feel that groups like this should be labeled terrorist groups as they act JUST LIKE the Taliban and Al Qaeda; except they are more of an actual threat.
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconferricplushy:
FerricPlushy Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
NOM and FRC are hate groups, I'm surprised you didn't mention the Evangelicals and their missionary trip to Uganda to encourage the government to make homosexuality punishable by death. Christians are evil, and they can't fathom ever being in the wrong.
Reply
:icondkalban:
Dkalban Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
I wouldnt consider the NOM OR FRC to be Christian by ANY stretch of the imagination
Reply
:iconferricplushy:
FerricPlushy Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
I don't see any christians denouncing these groups, I see them adhering to their believes whenever my mom watches john hagee, rod parsley, creflo dollar, or pat robertson though
Reply
:icondkalban:
Dkalban Featured By Owner Nov 13, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Speaking as a non-Christian; it makes me want to beat my head against the wall because even I have enough knowledge of Christianity to know that what they are doing is not Christian at all, let alone following the tenets of any faith
Reply
:iconjeysie:
Jeysie Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
"Why haven't we persecuted this organization for being a hate group yet?"

Because we still haven't struck a balance between free speech and preventing people from willfully harming others through verbal communication.
Reply
:icondkalban:
Dkalban Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
I think it's like the problem with the 2nd Amendment; too loosely defined.

In Europe, last I checked, hate speech is punishable.

Here, it isnt.

In Europe, Fox News type journalism wouldnt be allowed.

Here, it thrives.

We have a problem and the balance must be struck

And right wing religion needs to be told to act like adults OR be treated like children and/or terrorists
Reply
:iconjeysie:
Jeysie Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
I honestly think we need some kind of checks on the whole matter. What form they should take is the minefield, though.

It doesn't help that ironically the conservatives have co-opted liberal beliefs for their own benefit. Namely, the dogma of tolerance, political correctness, and equal consideration. They know everyone thinks many of their stances are bigoted and hateful, but as long as they can say that tolerance and PCness requires respecting their beliefs, and as long as they can leverage the growing cult of centrism...
Reply
:icondkalban:
Dkalban Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
i know...
Reply
:iconempiredice:
empiredice Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I imagine they escape the terrorist label because a)they don't directly attack and b)they aren't using actual weapons such as bombs or guns. Personally the only difference I'm seeing is that they're taking a roundabout, passive-aggressive route to terrorism. And anyone who's dealt with passive-aggressiveness knows that means they'll get away with it legally, it's "not their fault" people died since they didn't pull the trigger. Which of course, is bullshit. Is a conspiracy still a conspiracy if it's exposed?
Reply
:icondkalban:
Dkalban Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
IMO even passive aggressive terrorism is terrorism
Reply
Add a Comment: