CommunityPam's House Blend

Wal-mart's homosexual agenda causes fed-up fundie worker to quit

“Sam Walton was such a moral man, he wouldn’t even allow music to be sold in his stores if it had bad language. When it comes to moral values, first of all they started selling smutty magazines, then they brought in nasty music and videos, even ones others refused to sell, like ‘Brokeback Mountain.'”
— former worker Janet Baird, who loved Wal-mart so much in the past that she married at one of its events — but then our agenda corrupted the big box retailer

The WingNutDaily sub-headline says the worker “urges Christians to take stand because most people ‘unaware.'”

The Ohio woman, after hearing the shocking confirmation directly from the mega-corporation’s international headquarters that the company is, in fact, contributing to the financial and moral agenda of the nation’s “gay” chamber of commerce, she quit. And she’s not a bit worried.

“I got God backing me. That’s where I stand on it,” she told WND in an interview.

Baird initially contacted corporate HQ, concerned about the evil Brokeback development and the partnership of Wal-mart with the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. and didn’t get the answer she wanted to hear.

She called the corporate office for its response. “The lady said, ‘Yes.’ When I asked if the money I spent shopping at Wal-Mart would go to support same-sex marriage, she simply responded, ‘Sales are sales.'”

“I let her know how long I had worked at Wal-Mart and told her that I would no longer work for this company and never spend another dime there. She replied, ‘I hope you don’t mean that.’ I did mean it. The next day I went to the store and quit. The manager that signed my exit papers had no idea about what had been going on in the leadership of Wal-Mart.”

……”Today Wal-Mart is not the same company Mr. Sam started. I think he would rather see it go under than to see what it has become. Mr. Sam loved God – the store he began does not!”


Actual Freeper Quotes™

Now this is a woman with principals! We should be more like her and this agenda would be defeated. God bless her.

One of the companies top executives led the dialogue with NLGC, I understand. I don’t have his name handy but it is probably worth mentioning at some time in the future. I think a lot of people are experiencing a deep disappointment with the company that Sam Walton built on higher standards than people like Lee Scott have.

I personally used to love shopping at WalMart, but when they put up all their signs in English AND Spanish, I rarely go there now. Our community has Japanese, Vietnamese, Russian, Chinese and several others beside Mexicans.

I hope Sam is turning in his grave! I’ve been a very ardent supporter of Wal-Mart for 30 years! I will not buy from there again, unless they drop this agenda now.

One must wonder why so many companies feel it necessary to announce and implement programs and support for such a small segment of the population at the expense of alienating a much larger segment. 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.”

So once more, the assault by the leftists has succeeded in ‘taking down’ yet another corporation that was formerly based on family values vs. on leftist ‘no values’. How sad.

The answer is clear and obvious. WalMart is trying to get the socialist, anti-Corporation leftists off of it’s back. The only way to do that is to donate to their leftist causes and to embrace the ideology of the left. I bet the DemRats/leftists are celebrating everywhere over this.

So…Wal-Mart is run by perverts now….

Homosexuals are *not* “ordinary people” nor are they or ever will be “normal”. They are biological, genetic, sexual, and cultural, defectives.

So… gay people are the best and brightest among us? Genetically better or are they smarter because they have figured out new and exciting uses for their pee pees?

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.”

I think the GayLesbo crowd is doing shakedowns with these companies. Like Jesse Jackson did. Some stand and will not fall, many cave and pander.

It makes me so angry that gay and lesbian people have this need to fully define themselves by their sexual preference. Is there nothing else about their lives that is worth talking about? Honestly, most homosexuals I have known are the most creative, energetic people. Can’t they think of themselves as something other than “gay?”

[Ding ding ding! Had to go a bit downthread to find bestiality reference…]

Why on EARTH does any company (aside from one making sex toys, etc) need to create an entire marketing division focused on attracting people with a certain sexual preference? They did not hire a “heterosexual marketing” group, or a “beastiality marketing” group. Where is the “pedophile marketing” division? What other sexual preferences can they create an entire marketing division for?

[HERE IS A SHORT BREAK IN THE INSANITY — the next commenters are likely to get tossed out of Freeperland for these observations…]

Why don’t people stop paying their taxes since a hell of a lot more money from taxes goes to gays than does Wal-Mart money. Come on, Janet Naird, put your holier-than-thou money where your holier-than-thou mouth is. The government gives milllions to these groups. What do you intend to do about that? You could always move to A Middle Eastern country…..please?

===

“I got God backing me. That’s where I stand on it,” she told WND in an interview.

Let me know how much he pays. The people on these threads are pathetic. If you all boycotted every company that gave a few grand to some gay group, you’d be living out in the woods in a log cabin, chasing rabbits with a stick. Forget all the good Wal-Mart does and has done, all the people they employ, all the money they save Americans, they **GASP** gave a few thousand bucks to a gay group! The media has FReepers number with this story. It would be kind of funny were it not so sad.

===

Two reasons. One, 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.) 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.

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. 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. (I’m a math professor, so I know a lot of these kind of people. The aca
demic 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. It doesn’t bother me. My point being that the technical and creative people come from the university environments, and share the same culture.)

[END OF SANITY BREAK…That last commenter raised the ire of another Freeper, who responded at length (I love the use of “homosexual practitioners”)]:

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?

Previous post

Facing South on the election

Next post

Have you seen "Stop the Homosexual Agenda"?

Pam Spaulding

Pam Spaulding