'Cash is queen'
As expected, the release of HRC’s fifth annual Corporate Equality Index report, showing continued support for LGBT employees and consumers, has roused the wingnuts like clockwork (my earlier post is here). Witness the latest WND poll, titled “Cash is queen” (h/t Jeremy):
How does corporate support for the homosexual agenda impact your buying decisions?
I decided to surf over to the swamp to see how things were churning over this.
Legalize gay marriage and watch how these companies pull these benefits. You will see many gays then work to make gay marriage illegal as many don’t want to get married and don’t want to lose their benefits
leave policies?? What the heck? Ha! Something is really, really, really screwed up in our culture if companies are paying men to leave work so they can get breasts or slice off their manhood. Messed up to the nth degree.
official state position is that there is no discrimination. if you disagree, then you are invited to re-education camp where you can make Human Rights Campaign key chains as slave labor.
This is from the Human Rights Campaign. They are the rabid homosexual activists, they work with the lamnda legal group to push for the fiate by court order special rights for homosexuals. I would submit this can be gamed to be primarily Mass. and Calif. type corporations. The real issue is why stock holders don’t take issue with their PROFITS financing homosexuals’ recreation.
Company’s bring in ‘sociology’ experts to help them adapt the latest developments in the field, these ‘sociology’ experts come from universities, these universities push insane sociology theories in their classrooms. These so-called ‘sociology’ experts then push these insane ideas on the corporations that hire them. It’s a terrible thing.
This is one of the reasons why there needs to be some kind of regulation by the state for gay relationships. Regardless of what individual companies choose to do regarding their G & L employees and benefits in general, there is apt to be a greater legal mess in this area if there isn’t some concrete licensing of people’s cohabitation status, especially in the realm of benefits. I can’t believe I am saying this as one who claims to have libertarian tendencies—-better a few regulations than millions spent on lawsuits.
What proof is offered by beneficiaries to show they fit those categories? Is performance of perverted sexual acts in view of a corporate audience mandated or do you just state your sexual preference as a stand alone fact?