Greets, everyone. Unfortunately, there's a lot here that's not very happy.
A church in Mississippi asked a black couple to not get married in the church because some of the white congregants had never seen a black couple married in the church and didn't want to start at that point. One would think that the ones wanting to get married will find another church, one that isn't stuck in the Jim Crow Era.
Elsewhere, Chick-fil-A insists that their workers lie about the reason for the Henson Creature Shop toys being pulled, and tells them to nocomment about any events that might be happening at their stores. The second I can understand, along with the idea of "you can't tweet or facebook about this, because you work for us, and when you talk about us, it's in the voice of the company" (which I think is crap - people who work there should be allowed to complain about their work without repercussions), but the insistence on something other than the actual reason for pulling the toys is no good. You could even say something like "The Henson Company's values are incompatible with our principles and they chose to termiate their relationship with us.", which would be true and a benefit to your customers that believe in those principles with them. And, apparently, there are a lot of them - Chick-fil-A reported record sales on a day designated by conservative icons like Mike Huckabee as an appreciation day for the company. That day was designated in advance of a different day calling for a kiss-in at the restaurants between members of the same gender presentation as a protest against the remarks made that started the entire affair.
There's a message from Jesus to creationists about the poetic language in the foundational writings. In very non-poetic language. (Unless you think Tarantino is poetic.)
Ah, and also Eagle Scouts returning their Eagle awards to the Boy Scouts of America in protest over the BSA's continued exclusion of QUILTBAG people from their organization.
As new provisions that require insurance companies to cover contraception and preventative care without co-pays or deductible costs come into effect today, a Republican Representative from Pennsylvania likened the new provisions to the attack on Pearl Harbor and the 11 September attacks. Mr. Boehner declared that Republicans would do everything they could to reverse this set of provisions, because the Republicans believe they will win a war on women. In response to the Pennsylvania Representative's remarks, a veteran of the Pearl Harbor attacks responded, with a rhetorical equivalent of "Do you not understand the words coming out of your mouth?"
Out in the world today, Reuters confirms that the Obama administration is going to provide "support" to Syrian rebels, although what kind of support is not specified.
South Korean, Chinese, and Indonesian badminton teams were black-carded and disqualified from Olympic competition after it was apparent they were trying to lose so as to manipulate their seeding in the knockout round to try for an easier path to the finals. At least one commentator has laid the blame for the poor sportsmanship at the fault of the tournament organizers, for choosing a tournament format that encourages players to manipulate their results and said the competitors should be held blameless, as they were Playing To Win, and Playing To Win says that you take advantage of all the things you can to give yourself the highest possible chance of winning including flaws in tournament rules. (Original: suggested that such manipulation is totally okay and should be encouraged because the rules don't specifically say you can't.). In addition to the large amount of obvious ARGH that happens when anyone encourages, even if only implicitly, rules-lawyering in a context that doesn't specifically say that's okay, there's also this bit that pretty well precludes any sort of saying "rules-maipulation is totes okay!":
Remember when Mitt Romney said that Palestinians are poor because their culture is inferior? Mitt knew what he was saying. Even as the campaign tries to distance itself from the remarks, the conservative base is eating it up and repeating it as much as possible.
Domestically, The House Majority Whip said that the Congress was well and properly gridlocked to the point that the Congress won't be able to do anything big. They won't be able to do anything small, either, as it looks like the House will hang the Postal Service out to dry and force them to default on pension payments.
Fox News called Elizabeth Warren and Newt Gingrich communists, because both talked about the need to increase infrastructure spending to match China's, in terms of percentages. Elsewhere, House Speaker Boehner said that President Obama had never held a real job.
Mitt Romney's tax plan would favor the rich with giant tax breaks...and increase the tax burden for the middle and lower class by expiring some of their current breaks.
In their remarkably-focused on jobs, jobs, ja-oh, forget it. A House Representative announced a hearing on making English the official language of the United States. Which he has championed for years, and which he believes will make the country stronger. Because then he and his friends will have an excuse to make all of the immigrants learn his language and culture and be able to stand behind the law when he does it.
In technology, a bone marrow transplant from HIV-resistant donors is able to knock back an infection, at least in two people who received a transplant, mirroring the same condition in another person in Berlin. Now, it's still a bone marrow transplant, done during anti-retroviral therapy, so we're not to the anti-HIV treatment / vaccination. Yet, that is.
There is one good thing for tonight: a group of cosplayers that made sure a situation did not get out of hand...with a classic line delivered at the appropriate time.
So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's talk a little bit about the Chick-fil-A thing. The CEO of the company gave an interview in which he said that he supported a definition of family that excluded anyone not cis and hetero. The company itself officially said that it treats everyone with honor, dignity, and respect, regardless of the things that the CEO said he had an opinion on. So far, so good. Everyone's exercising their free speech right, and people who want to protest, support, or boycott the company over those remarks are exercising their free speech rights.
Even if the CEO spends and donates his own personal cash to causes you disagree with, that's his prerogative, and yours to donate to your favored charities or to boycott the business based on that. (Or based on the prevalence of Torah and Christian Foundational Writings excerpts on their packaging, wrapping, and so forth.) But when someone, CEO or otherwise, donates corporate funds to groups, they cross a line that was until recently considered to be a third rail if they did it openly. (The potential consumer backlash against a company was usually sufficient to keep them from donating anything that could be easily tracked. This was an era where disclosure was also more stringent.) Even now, the donations from corporations are funneled through their charitable foundations and arms, so as to provide potential plausible deniability. (And/or tax breaks.) So, if you want to know why people are getting upset about Chick-fil-A in this way, it's important to follow the money. So have a look at what they donate to - Exodus International, an "ex-gay therapy" outfit, the Fellowship of Christian athletes, who believed in people "being delivered" from being gay, the Family Research Council, whose statements from Bryan Fisher we have noted, snarked, and raged at, and organizations that also fund them and other organizations of the same basic mission. And that's with the corporate coffers. And it has been that way for years. (More evidence collected by![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
redsixwing in an excellent summary of Chick-fil-A's corporate practices and charitable donations.)
So why is that a problem? Donating with the corporate coffers is the equivalent of saying "everyone here at this company agrees with your mission and values, so much so that we want to fund you." Considering that if you gathered twelve random people in a room and asked them to agree on a fundamental political belief, you'd end up with six different interpretations, it's damn near impossible for an entire corporation to agree on a fundamental political belief (unless said corporation is specifically created to advance that political belief, of course) from executives to front-line workers.
This is the long way of saying "There's got to be someone working for Chick-Fil-A who is QUILTBAG or disagrees with the company's donations or the statements of the CEO who cannot speak out and cannot find work in another company, but will have to suffer the ill opinion of others against them, because they're the front line staff." This loops back to the idea of "If you are employed by The Company, when you talk about The Company, you must be in line with The Company's official positions, unless you want to be un-employed by The Company." At least, in any public or findable conversation that you have on a medium that records them. Which stifles any conversation from within about disagreement with the official policies, and allows easy characterization of anyone who does talk about it on their way out as "disgruntled" or some other easily-dismissable adjective.
So the complaints need to be directed at the right place - the corporate offices, the management, and the people who do the donating decisions. A large-scale peaceful demonstration and/or boycott is your prerogative to draw attention to the issue, too, which hopefully translates into pressure being put in the right place by organizations that have the resources to do it. Or to support the people that Chick-Fil-A marginalizes and Others through their donations.
It's also disheartening to see so many people supporting Chick-Fil-A with their dollars, because it's a pretty solid sign that the issue of marriage equality is far from settled in the cultural mind. After a certain amount of people, it becomes almost incomprehensible - "Why do so many people want to fund an organization that actively promotes Othering?" More often than not, the answer appears to be "Because I believe God tells me to." And that, by itself, is apparently enough. Which makes me wonder about whether those organizations and belief systems need to take another look at the reasons why they believe and do things, to see whether they have room in their houses for people they have normally classed as Others, Outside.
That's it for tonight. Perhaps the cloud of bad news things will lift soon.
A church in Mississippi asked a black couple to not get married in the church because some of the white congregants had never seen a black couple married in the church and didn't want to start at that point. One would think that the ones wanting to get married will find another church, one that isn't stuck in the Jim Crow Era.
Elsewhere, Chick-fil-A insists that their workers lie about the reason for the Henson Creature Shop toys being pulled, and tells them to nocomment about any events that might be happening at their stores. The second I can understand, along with the idea of "you can't tweet or facebook about this, because you work for us, and when you talk about us, it's in the voice of the company" (which I think is crap - people who work there should be allowed to complain about their work without repercussions), but the insistence on something other than the actual reason for pulling the toys is no good. You could even say something like "The Henson Company's values are incompatible with our principles and they chose to termiate their relationship with us.", which would be true and a benefit to your customers that believe in those principles with them. And, apparently, there are a lot of them - Chick-fil-A reported record sales on a day designated by conservative icons like Mike Huckabee as an appreciation day for the company. That day was designated in advance of a different day calling for a kiss-in at the restaurants between members of the same gender presentation as a protest against the remarks made that started the entire affair.
There's a message from Jesus to creationists about the poetic language in the foundational writings. In very non-poetic language. (Unless you think Tarantino is poetic.)
Ah, and also Eagle Scouts returning their Eagle awards to the Boy Scouts of America in protest over the BSA's continued exclusion of QUILTBAG people from their organization.
As new provisions that require insurance companies to cover contraception and preventative care without co-pays or deductible costs come into effect today, a Republican Representative from Pennsylvania likened the new provisions to the attack on Pearl Harbor and the 11 September attacks. Mr. Boehner declared that Republicans would do everything they could to reverse this set of provisions, because the Republicans believe they will win a war on women. In response to the Pennsylvania Representative's remarks, a veteran of the Pearl Harbor attacks responded, with a rhetorical equivalent of "Do you not understand the words coming out of your mouth?"
Out in the world today, Reuters confirms that the Obama administration is going to provide "support" to Syrian rebels, although what kind of support is not specified.
South Korean, Chinese, and Indonesian badminton teams were black-carded and disqualified from Olympic competition after it was apparent they were trying to lose so as to manipulate their seeding in the knockout round to try for an easier path to the finals. At least one commentator has laid the blame for the poor sportsmanship at the fault of the tournament organizers, for choosing a tournament format that encourages players to manipulate their results and said the competitors should be held blameless, as they were Playing To Win, and Playing To Win says that you take advantage of all the things you can to give yourself the highest possible chance of winning including flaws in tournament rules. (Original: suggested that such manipulation is totally okay and should be encouraged because the rules don't specifically say you can't.). In addition to the large amount of obvious ARGH that happens when anyone encourages, even if only implicitly, rules-lawyering in a context that doesn't specifically say that's okay, there's also this bit that pretty well precludes any sort of saying "rules-maipulation is totes okay!":
In the name of all the competitors I promise that we shall take part in these Olympic Games, respecting and abiding by the rules which govern them, committing ourselves to a sport without doping and without drugs, in the true spirit of sportsmanship, for the glory of sport and the honor of our teams.That pretty well says "Don't be a dick." (Wheaton's Law applies in several contexts.) So yeah, intentionally losing to manipulate your place in the seeding - no, that's clearly outside the rules. Black cards are definitely in order there. (For the original commentator, they suggest simply forfeiting the match rather than playing to lose, and that all rules about "not exhibiting best effort" or other sportsmanship rules are band-aids to the flaws that are in the tournament design itself.)
Remember when Mitt Romney said that Palestinians are poor because their culture is inferior? Mitt knew what he was saying. Even as the campaign tries to distance itself from the remarks, the conservative base is eating it up and repeating it as much as possible.
Domestically, The House Majority Whip said that the Congress was well and properly gridlocked to the point that the Congress won't be able to do anything big. They won't be able to do anything small, either, as it looks like the House will hang the Postal Service out to dry and force them to default on pension payments.
Fox News called Elizabeth Warren and Newt Gingrich communists, because both talked about the need to increase infrastructure spending to match China's, in terms of percentages. Elsewhere, House Speaker Boehner said that President Obama had never held a real job.
Mitt Romney's tax plan would favor the rich with giant tax breaks...and increase the tax burden for the middle and lower class by expiring some of their current breaks.
In their remarkably-focused on jobs, jobs, ja-oh, forget it. A House Representative announced a hearing on making English the official language of the United States. Which he has championed for years, and which he believes will make the country stronger. Because then he and his friends will have an excuse to make all of the immigrants learn his language and culture and be able to stand behind the law when he does it.
In technology, a bone marrow transplant from HIV-resistant donors is able to knock back an infection, at least in two people who received a transplant, mirroring the same condition in another person in Berlin. Now, it's still a bone marrow transplant, done during anti-retroviral therapy, so we're not to the anti-HIV treatment / vaccination. Yet, that is.
There is one good thing for tonight: a group of cosplayers that made sure a situation did not get out of hand...with a classic line delivered at the appropriate time.
So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's talk a little bit about the Chick-fil-A thing. The CEO of the company gave an interview in which he said that he supported a definition of family that excluded anyone not cis and hetero. The company itself officially said that it treats everyone with honor, dignity, and respect, regardless of the things that the CEO said he had an opinion on. So far, so good. Everyone's exercising their free speech right, and people who want to protest, support, or boycott the company over those remarks are exercising their free speech rights.
Even if the CEO spends and donates his own personal cash to causes you disagree with, that's his prerogative, and yours to donate to your favored charities or to boycott the business based on that. (Or based on the prevalence of Torah and Christian Foundational Writings excerpts on their packaging, wrapping, and so forth.) But when someone, CEO or otherwise, donates corporate funds to groups, they cross a line that was until recently considered to be a third rail if they did it openly. (The potential consumer backlash against a company was usually sufficient to keep them from donating anything that could be easily tracked. This was an era where disclosure was also more stringent.) Even now, the donations from corporations are funneled through their charitable foundations and arms, so as to provide potential plausible deniability. (And/or tax breaks.) So, if you want to know why people are getting upset about Chick-fil-A in this way, it's important to follow the money. So have a look at what they donate to - Exodus International, an "ex-gay therapy" outfit, the Fellowship of Christian athletes, who believed in people "being delivered" from being gay, the Family Research Council, whose statements from Bryan Fisher we have noted, snarked, and raged at, and organizations that also fund them and other organizations of the same basic mission. And that's with the corporate coffers. And it has been that way for years. (More evidence collected by
redsixwing in an excellent summary of Chick-fil-A's corporate practices and charitable donations.)So why is that a problem? Donating with the corporate coffers is the equivalent of saying "everyone here at this company agrees with your mission and values, so much so that we want to fund you." Considering that if you gathered twelve random people in a room and asked them to agree on a fundamental political belief, you'd end up with six different interpretations, it's damn near impossible for an entire corporation to agree on a fundamental political belief (unless said corporation is specifically created to advance that political belief, of course) from executives to front-line workers.
This is the long way of saying "There's got to be someone working for Chick-Fil-A who is QUILTBAG or disagrees with the company's donations or the statements of the CEO who cannot speak out and cannot find work in another company, but will have to suffer the ill opinion of others against them, because they're the front line staff." This loops back to the idea of "If you are employed by The Company, when you talk about The Company, you must be in line with The Company's official positions, unless you want to be un-employed by The Company." At least, in any public or findable conversation that you have on a medium that records them. Which stifles any conversation from within about disagreement with the official policies, and allows easy characterization of anyone who does talk about it on their way out as "disgruntled" or some other easily-dismissable adjective.
So the complaints need to be directed at the right place - the corporate offices, the management, and the people who do the donating decisions. A large-scale peaceful demonstration and/or boycott is your prerogative to draw attention to the issue, too, which hopefully translates into pressure being put in the right place by organizations that have the resources to do it. Or to support the people that Chick-Fil-A marginalizes and Others through their donations.
It's also disheartening to see so many people supporting Chick-Fil-A with their dollars, because it's a pretty solid sign that the issue of marriage equality is far from settled in the cultural mind. After a certain amount of people, it becomes almost incomprehensible - "Why do so many people want to fund an organization that actively promotes Othering?" More often than not, the answer appears to be "Because I believe God tells me to." And that, by itself, is apparently enough. Which makes me wonder about whether those organizations and belief systems need to take another look at the reasons why they believe and do things, to see whether they have room in their houses for people they have normally classed as Others, Outside.
That's it for tonight. Perhaps the cloud of bad news things will lift soon.
