22
   

Disney Threatens to Boycott Georgia Over Anti-Gay Bill

 
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 07:26 am
@Setanta,
Forgive me but your point escapes me.
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 07:51 am
Quote:
The NBA released a statement tonight criticizing the recently signed North Carolina House Bill 2, and implicitly throwing Charlotte’s hosting of the 2017 NBA All-Star Game into doubt:

“The NBA is dedicated to creating an inclusive environment for all who attend our games and events. We are deeply concerned that this discriminatory law runs counter to our guiding principles of equality and mutual respect and do not yet know what impact it will have on our ability to successfully host the 2017 All-Star Game in Charlotte.”

House Bill 2 is a measure that prevents North Carolina cities from passing anti-LGBT discrimination laws of their own. It was written in response to a recently passed anti-discrimination ordinance in Charlotte that prevents business from discriminating against gay, lesbian, and transgender customers, and among other provisions allows transgender people to use the bathroom of the gender they identify as. Charlotte’s ordinance was scheduled to go into effect April 1, but is now superseded by House Bill 2.

The NBA’s implicit threat to pull the All-Star Game piles more pressure upon the North Carolina legislature to repeal the legislation. The NCAA has said they are monitoring the situation, and large corporations with offices in North Carolina like PayPal, Dow Chemical, Google, and American Airlines have condemned the law


http://deadspin.com/the-nba-is-deeply-concerned-about-north-carolina-anti-1766958687

I'm waiting for NASCAR to say something.....
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 07:56 am
@boomerang,
North Carolina Gov. McCrory in Hot Seat as Apple, Google, NBA, Many Others Denounce Anti-LGBT Law
Quote:
North Carolina's Democratic Attorney General Roy Cooper opposes HB2, the bill McCrory called for and signed into law just 12 hours after lawmakers rammed it through the General Assembly in a special session. Cooper, who is challenging McCrory for the governorship, said it best: "The governor lit the match and stood aside, while the fire grew out of control."

0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  3  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 10:48 am
Quote:
As of Thursday afternoon, studios who have released statements either condemning the bill or threatening to boycott the state of Georgia include Disney, Viacom, CBS, Comcast NBC Universal (good lord, what a name), AMC, Discovery, Time Warner, Lions Gate, The Weinstein Company, Starz, and Sony.

So basically, you know, Hollywood.


Quote:
As you know, Atlanta is often referred to as the Hollywood of the South. During the last fiscal year, at least 248 films and television productions were shot in Georgia, adding at least $1.7 billion in direct spending to the state’s economy


http://jezebel.com/just-about-all-of-hollywood-might-boycott-georgia-if-go-1766924810
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 10:54 am
@boomerang,
I don't see NASCAR antagonizing their southern Baptist audience. I'd love to be wrong about that.

http://brandongaille.com/52-fantastic-nascar-demographics/

Quote:
Do The Demographics of NASCAR Hurt of Help?

The average NASCAR fan is almost 2x more likely to be over 45 than under 29.
African-Americans are 27% less likely and Hispanics are 20% less likely to follow the sport when compared to Caucasians.
The average NASCAR fan is twice as likely to live in rural areas of the South or Midwest.
1 in 5 NASCAR fans is likely to support gun laws that are more lenient compared to the rest of the general US population.
1 in 4 NASCAR fans say that their religious beliefs are very important to them.
NASCAR fans are 50% more likely to be registered Republicans than Democrats.


Quote:
NASCAR has the highest share of Caucasians that watch the sport than any other US sport at 94%.
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 11:13 am
@McGentrix,
I agree that they shouldn't blackmail...isn't blackmail illegal?

But it appears what they are doing is taking their business elsewhere.

As far as corporations vs. citizens...bottom line it is about the money. Corporations may be more effective because it is hitting pocket book by a greater amount. My guess that the corporations are acting such because of the money as well. Looking at their customers this boycotting may help them financially. Sometimes corporations do things for moral reasons, but more often than not it is the financial impact.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 11:39 am
@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:

I agree that they shouldn't blackmail...isn't blackmail illegal?

But it appears what they are doing is taking their business elsewhere.

As far as corporations vs. citizens...bottom line it is about the money. Corporations may be more effective because it is hitting pocket book by a greater amount. My guess that the corporations are acting such because of the money as well. Looking at their customers this boycotting may help them financially. Sometimes corporations do things for moral reasons, but more often than not it is the financial impact.


Blackmail may be a bit strong, more like extortion. Do what we want or else...

Were it me, I would allow the companies to follow through with their plans and I would make it VERY public. Let everyone know which companies are doing what, when and why. Post all documentation from all the lawyers and boards.

See which companies actually follow through. I would venture a guess that the Governor has already said he was going to veto and these companies are white knighting off that. I doubt very seriously a single company mentioned would make such bold statements if the outcome were unknown.

Again, let me reiterate, NOT A SINGLE COMPANY HAS DONE ANYTHING EXCEPT MAKE THREATS. I bolded that for the vision impaired thinking these companies are actually doing something.
parados
 
  3  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 12:04 pm
@boomerang,
Quote:
I'm waiting for NASCAR to say something.....


Like normal, they are racing around in circles.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 12:16 pm
@McGentrix,
It's always and still a bit .... surprising when I read these discussions.
We've got separation of state and church - de facto not really, but at least and since more than 130 years, a marriage is only legal when done at registry offices. (In my part of Germany, even since 200 years.)

So if you want a church wedding, you must be married before. And if your religion has some rules under which you can't get their blessings - be it so.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 12:25 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Same in Italy, unless it's changed there. I'm not completely positive re having the register business done first, but I'm assuming it is the same as you describe. I took a couple of great photos (if I do say so myself) of a registry wedding group at the Campadoglio, and (I take it), another registry wedding couple being photographed by a photographer in Piazza Navona. There are benefits to being in Italy off season.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 12:36 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:
Same in Italy, unless it's changed there. I'm not completely positive re having the register business done first, but I'm assuming it is the same as you describe.
In most European countries there is a civil ceremony requirement. You are free to to marry in a religious ceremony afterwards (not many do it, though).
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2016 12:52 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
That makes sense.

I've been reading up, for differing reasons, about what happened over time with the pre-marital blood test requirements in the U.S. I used to take blood for them at one clinical lab I worked in, um, when, 1968. Interesting, in that some famous people were patients from time to time.
0 Replies
 
momoends
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 04:59 am
@tsarstepan,
i think money is always a more powerful reason/argument then any values or ideals worth to fight for
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 05:47 am
@revelette2,
You spoke of the lines between church and state being blurred. Originally, constitutional strictures on the power of the government were held to be binding on the Federal government, but not the states. Some states had religious establishments--in Connecticut there was a Congregational establishment. Everyone had to pay a church tax, whether or not they were members of that church; the church tax was for the support of the established church. (The Danbury Baptists spoke only of those wo rise to power and wealth through the suppression of others--but everyone at that time knew what time it was.)

The no-establishment clause has been incorporated as a result of the Fourteenth Amendment. Because of the due process clause of that amendment, rights in the Bill of Rights have been held to bind the states as well as the Federal government.
momoends
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 09:20 am
@McGentrix,
if it were about disney announcing they won´t continue their business relationship with a country who exploits children you would see it as bad as you see it now. they´re paying for the facilities to the government, taxes, linceses ... Disney is a money maker machine for the government, not the other way around.... as any private company they have the right to decide what´s important when choosing who they want to make business with
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 09:37 am
@momoends,
momoends wrote:

if it were about disney announcing they won´t continue their business relationship with a country who exploits children you would see it as bad as you see it now. they´re paying for the facilities to the government, taxes, linceses ... Disney is a money maker machine for the government, not the other way around.... as any private company they have the right to decide what´s important when choosing who they want to make business with


Exactly. Kind of.

Disney has the right to operate where ever it feels like. As do most companies in the US and abroad. But, they do not have the right to try to alter the legislative process of the state they work in. They can hire lobbyists to work the representatives to vote for the change they want.

Let's put it another way. In your town there is an awesome contractor. I mean this person is just awesome. Always on time and under budget. Every one wants them to do their work. One day the contractor decides that they do not like that people are having abortions in town. He says that unless everyone stops having abortions, he is going to up and move his business away.

Do you think everyone in town is going to be happy about that? Do you think the town is going allow that contractor to get away with making threats like that?
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 09:56 am
@McGentrix,
They "plan to take our business elsewhere should any legislation allowing discriminatory practices be signed into state law".

You may call this a try to alter the legislative process of the state they work in.
But such is common practise elsewhere, e.g. see the "BREXIT"-discussion in the UK. Or any company, small business etc which announces to leave a municipality because of higher local taxes than in the neighbouring town.
0 Replies
 
momoends
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 10:20 am
@McGentrix,
oh wow contractors have cancelled economic agreements because of not being giving the financial and fiscal privileges they asked for over and over again all over the world. Is that more acceptable than ethical issues being the caused of businesses moved away? the only thing that unhappy town can do is not bending to their conditions and let them go.
let me asked you what you think about a town establishing a law that goes against´t human rights not taking into consideration whether it gets in conflict with its business partners or not? Do you think every company is going to be happy about it? do you think the company are going to allow that town making them betray their ethical business policy without any consequences?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2016 10:44 am
@McGentrix,
some town or country is going to let the contractor get away with it -and there's a chance the contractor will move there

it happens all the time

it's a giant game of corporate / government chicken out there
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Mar, 2016 09:33 am
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/georgia-governor-veto-religious-freedom-law-n-c-sued-lgbt-n546636?cid=sm_fb

Quote:
The backlash against efforts to weaken anti-discrimination protections for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people took sharp turns on Monday, when Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal announced he will veto a controversial religious freedom bill and activists sued North Carolina's governor over a law that blocked cities from passing their own protections.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 2.21 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 08:48:06