Connect with us

NOM Attacks Target: ‘Marriage Isn’t Terribly Pertinent To Their Business.’ Huh?

Published

on

NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, is attacking retailing giant Target, falsely claiming, “Marriage isn’t terribly pertinent to their business.” NOM, who has said that marriage is “the bedrock of civilization,” is going after Target, who sells millions of products for the home, children, and families, often at an attractive price. Target even does a booming wedding registry business and is listed as one of the top retailers who share in the $19 billion wedding registry market. Target is currently promoting a “Wear it with pride” tee shirt campaign, giving all proceeds to the Family Equality Council.

The comment was included in this segment of last night’s Politico article, “Gay marriage advocates gain corporate support“:

Jonathan Baker, director of the Corporate Fairness Project for the NOM, said the group, which has begun a campaign to oppose corporate support for same sex-marriage, isn’t looking to recruit business support for traditional marriage.

“A lot of businesses were getting into a pro same-sex marriage position. Our goal was to support the other side of that,” Baker said. “Our goal is not to have Target supporting traditional marriage. Our goal is to have Target stay neutral.”

Baker added: “Marriage isn’t terribly pertinent to their business.”

Marriage is dramatically “pertinent” to Target’s business — to most retailers’ businesses, actually — and Target can only benefit from more marriages forming. Shower presents, wedding presents, new home presents, new baby presents, and newlyweds shopping for new items for their home and families, are just a portion of how retailers like Target benefit from marriages — of same-sex or opposite sex couples.

For NOM to claim that marriage “isn’t terribly pertinent” to Target, and to tell them to remain “neutral” in the fight for marriage equality, demonstrates just how very ignorant about business — and marriage – Jonathan Baker and NOM are.

The Politico piece also notes:

NOM launched a “Dump Starbucks” campaign this year, challenging the coffee company’s vocal support for gay marriage. It is also proposing a Bank of America shareholder resolution aimed at enshrining freedom of speech for employees who support or oppose gay marriage.

NOM’s “Dump Starbucks” campaign, as The New Civil Rights Movement has noted repeatedly, is an embarrassing failure. NOM continues to use it as a fundraising tool, announcing vast goals, then doesn’t report on its performance, a clear indication they are not achieving their own goals.

And in fact, Starbucks’ stock has performed better — in a down market, and in a down segment –from the day NOM rolled out their Dump Starbucks campaign designed to harm the coffee giant.

Politico adds:

Even if companies aren’t supporting gay marriage efforts, what’s important is they’re not fighting them, said Marc Solomon, national campaign director of Freedom to Marry.

“I don’t think you see any corporations taking stances against equality,” he said. “You’re either taking a stance in favor of equality or you don’t take a stance at all. We’ve certainly defeated our opponents with respect to getting corporations to take an anti-gay stance.”

One by one, national corporations like Microsoft, Starbucks, Boeing and Google are wading into the once-risky business of taking a position supporting gay marriage in states across the country.

Nowhere is that more apparent than in the lawsuit challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which a federal appeals court called unconstitutional on Thursday. Forty-eight companies, including Nike, Time Warner Cable, Aetna, Exelon Corp., and Xerox had signed a brief arguing that the law negatively affected their businesses.

Jonathan Baker and NOM. Terribly off-target.

 

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Ghislaine Maxwell to Request to Be Freed From Prison

Published

on

Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted child sex offender and associate of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, has filed court documents seeking to be released from prison, reportedly “throwing a wrench” into the Justice Department’s efforts to release “scores” of files released to her case.

“Lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime Epstein counterpart, wrote in a letter filed Wednesday in federal court that she plans to soon file a court petition challenging her detention, a long-shot bid that, if successful, could result in a new trial,” The Hill reported.

Maxwell’s attorneys “said Maxwell does not take a position on the government’s request to unseal grand jury transcripts,” but, “to do so could imperil a retrial if her challenge, called a habeas petition, prevails.”

The New York Times added, “Although the judge, Paul A. Engelmayer, previously denied a request by the Justice Department to release those documents, Ms. Bondi made her latest motion under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was signed by Mr. Trump last month.”

According to CNN, “lawyers for Epstein’s estate told the judge they do not take a position as to the unsealing of records given the government’s ‘commitment’ to redacting victim and personally identifying information.”

READ MORE: Trump Urges Judge Aileen Cannon to Keep Jack Smith Report Secret

 

Image: Wikimedia Commons/Public domain

Continue Reading

News

Johnson Slammed After Timeline to Swear In Newest GOP Member Revealed

Published

on

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson is coming under fire after a report revealed he expects to swear in this week the newest Republican elected to Congress, Matt Van Epps, for whom Johnson campaigned. Van Epps won a narrow victory Tuesday night in a deep red Tennessee district. The move comes after Johnson most recently delayed seating Democratic U.S. Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona for 50 days.

Johnson offered an array of explanations for why he would not swear in Congresswoman Grijalva, who won her September election for a seat vacant since March but was not seated until November.

Among his reasons were that the House was not in session, there was a federal government shutdown, and her election had to be officially certified. Critics noted that other members-elect had been sworn in under similar circumstances.

READ MORE: Trump Urges Judge Aileen Cannon to Keep Jack Smith Report Secret

In October, The Guardian reported that Grijalva “thinks she knows the reason why Johnson is in no rush to administer the oath: in addition to co-sponsoring bills on the environment, public education and other issues she campaigned on addressing, Grijalva plans to provide the final signature on a petition that would force a vote on legislation to release files related to accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein – which the speaker and Donald Trump oppose.”

Now, critics are blasting Johnson, after Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman reported on the Speaker’s expected timeline.

READ MORE: Trump Overrules Johnson in Dramatic GOP Showdown

“I was led to believe that waiting almost two months was customary and totally normal,” snarked Robbie Sherwood, communications director of the Arizona House Democratic Caucus.

“Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, the last member had to wait 50 days,” observed political commentator Molly Jong-Fast.

“Oh so he can just swear anyone in immediately if he feels like it,” noted Hemant Mehta, who writes the Friendly Atheist on Substack.

“Guess the speed of democracy depends on who you voted for and what they look like,” charged Democratic strategist Adam Parkhomenko.

READ MORE: Amid Johnson’s ‘Exodus Problem’ One House Republican Declares ‘Fresh Blood Is Good’

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Amid Johnson’s ‘Exodus Problem’ One House Republican Declares ‘Fresh Blood Is Good’

Published

on

After Democrats’ strong showing in Tuesday’s deep-red Tennessee special election — losing by single digits in a district Trump won by 22 points — political pundits and anonymous Republican lawmakers have begun predicting a large GOP exodus from the House of Representatives after the winter break.

Already, Speaker Johnson has a razor-thin margin, and numerous Republicans, like U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, have announced their retirement.

“More than two dozen GOP lawmakers have already announced their decision to leave their seats at the end of the term, and the number is expected to grow in the coming weeks as lawmakers visit their families for the holidays, complicating Republican efforts to fend off a blue wave and keep their slim majority,” The Hill reported on Wednesday.

READ MORE: Trump Overrules Johnson in Dramatic GOP Showdown

According to the House Press Gallery, 24 Republicans have announced they are retiring or seeking another office.

“Ultimately, the number of Republican retirements that we see compared to 2018 — I would imagine it would be close to the same number when all is said and done,” Erin Covey, House editor at the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, told The Hill. The news outlet noted that in 2018, “Republicans got clobbered.”

“Overall,” The Hill added, “34 House Republicans chose not to seek reelection and 14 had resigned during their term in the 2018 cycle. Democrats ended up winning control of the House that year.”

Some have suggested that Speaker Johnson could lose his gavel before the end of this Congress if Republicans continue to resign.

Reasons for leaving Congress are myriad. Some, like U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX), the former White House Physician to the President, “noted many of his fellow colleagues he knows are stepping away to spend more time with their families.”

READ MORE: Trump Urges Judge Aileen Cannon to Keep Jack Smith Report Secret

U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) told the Hill that House Republicans are “consigned to be automatons.”

“They just have to do whatever Trump wants them to do. What fun is that, if you’re an adult?” he asked.

But one House Republican has a different take on what The Hill is calling House Republicans’ “exodus problem.”

U.S. Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL), who just took office in April, welcomes the expected changes to the GOP conference.

“Fresh blood is good,” he told The Hill. “I don’t think people serving for 50 years is a great thing, so I think turnover is a good thing.”

READ MORE: Trump Seen Struggling to Stay Awake Repeatedly in Cabinet Meeting Video

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.