NOM BLOG

THANK YOU for Dumping Starbucks and Standing Up for Marriage!

 

Dump Starbucks

Welcome! Thank you so much for taking the DumpStarbucks.com pledge. You and more than 30,000 other Americans are standing up to Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz and letting him know we think Starbucks should be selling coffee—not pushing gay marriage! Thank you.

I'm Jonathan Baker, head of NOM's Corporate Fairness Project. I was there at the Starbucks annual meeting at the Seattle Opera House in March because I really wanted to ask Howard a question: His executives were claiming the corporation endorsed gay marriage in Washington State, and that they did so because gay marriage is "core" to the Starbucks brand. Like you, I respect the role that businesses play in creating great products and services, as well as jobs, so I wanted to make sure that this view that Starbucks=Gay Marriage was endorsed at the top.

And like you I was shocked when Howard told me "yes." So we launched our ongoing DumpStarbucks.com campaign to let these rich guys in their Seattle bubble know: diversity and tolerance should include us too! Don't trample on the sacred values of so many of your customers and employees, Howard. It's not nice, it's not smart, and it's certainly not inclusive!

Each week, I'd like to share with you the latest developments in this campaign, the news stories and more importantly the stories from people like you who are making your voices heard!

Most recently we have taken DumpStarbucks.com international! Last week our Mandarin, Arabic, Turkish, Spanish, and Indonesian translations of the Dump Starbucks website went live. While the international effort is still in its infancy, folks in China are beginning to take notice, with Beijing Shots offering a liberal take on our site and advertising. National Public Radio also picked up on our international efforts.

This past week OneNewsNow picked up on the DumpStarbucks.com campaign with their story, "What Coffee is your Church Drinking?"

Let me share with you the courageous story of one DumpStarbucks.com supporter who emailed her experience to us.

At about 1PM today (4-4-12), I walked into Starbucks, Flower Hill (Gaithersburg, MD) and asked to speak to the manager. A young woman appeared, speaking with an Eastern European accent. I told her that we had been regular Starbucks patrons (including at this location), but that we no longer would be...anywhere. I then said: "We, and many we know, have chosen to join the international boycott of Starbucks, because of their recently-announced corporate 'core values', which include the support of same-sex marriage. I oppose this policy for religious reasons. This is a serious moral issue, which affects our whole society. Thus, it is an infringement upon and an offense to my religious values & freedoms." The manager answered very sympathetically and courteously, saying, "Oh, I didn't know about this [corporate policy]; I'm so sorry this offends you!" I then asked her to pass on my comments to the corporate level, and she readily agreed to do so.

At this point I nodded & said, "Thank you for listening."

Tell us what you think. Is this something you'd be willing to do? We’d love to hear your story, whether it involves going to a store manager, or simply sharing your thoughts with a few friends. Just hit "reply."

I have one thing you can do today to help make your voice heard. If you are a Facebook user can you go on your Facebook page and "like" the DumpStarbucks.com Facebook page. Thank you so much for caring about God's vision of marriage—and about corporate fairness. We look forward to continuing to work with you as we support marriage and the workplace rights of employees and customers to hold personal opinions on marriage without being told by corporations their views are unacceptable.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Baker
Director—Corporate Fairness Project
National Organization for Marriage

The National Organization for Marriage Education Fund is a 501(c)(3) organization, gifts to which are deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax purposes.

27 Comments