Slashdot Mirror
What If There Was a Microsoft Appreciation Day?
theodp writes "In 2005, Microsoft came under fire after withdrawing support for an anti-gay-discrimination bill. 'I don't want the company to be in the position of appearing to dismiss the deeply-held beliefs of any employee, by picking sides on social policy issues,' explained CEO Steve Ballmer. That was then. Microsoft — like Google and Amazon — has since very publicly declared its support for gay-marriage legislation, which means it — unlike Chick-fil-A — needn't worry about the 'deeply-held beliefs of any employee' causing it to be blocked from doing business by the mayors of Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco. I guess we'll never know what Microsoft versions of 'Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day' or 'National Same-Sex Kiss Day' would have looked like."
Other than just trying to rile up commentators? Clickbait much?
Soulskill: This article is bad and you should feel bad.
how much $$$ did /. receive to remove it?
What If There Was an End to All These Silly Interrogatory Posts at Slashdot?
...that most IT companies have led the way on gay rights.
OK, Microsoft was a little slower than a few off the blocks, but in general I think that IT corporations should be proud of their lead in this issue, and MS should be applauded for being among them.
Still won't stop me loading up Linux instead though...
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
... because they don't know what the software market was like before them.
A good CAD setup including workstation and licenses could be $100K. A mainframe to handle your accounting could be $6000 per month.
Personal computing - IBM, Microsoft, and Apple - demolished the old model which was low volume, buggy software at high prices. I have no illusions about their intentions, they've made more money than any emperor. But I do appreciate what they created.
What if Slashdot just stuck to posting actual news stories instead of speculatory flamebait?
I don't consider it real progress that some companies come out in support of gay marriage, while others are against it. I go to Pride, but I wish we didn't have it. Real progress will be when it ceases to matter whether or not you're gay; When it's as natural as not being gay.
It's like black history month. I don't support that either. People call me racist for it, but I don't. There is no black history month; Black history is American history. It's human history. And their accomplishments should be celebrated the same way as every other historical accomplishment is. We don't need a "special olympics" history for people based on the color of their skin, we need to delete those divisions from our history books, mentioning only that there was a period of time (known as the Stupid Ages) when it was relevant, and then we grew up and put a stop to it. Ta-da, the end.
It'll be progress with companies like Chic-Fil A say they don't support gay marriage or homosexuality, and gets no press coverage at all. Like, wait, what? Why the fuck does anyone care what a fast food restaurant owner thinks about a perfectly natural state of being? That'd be like Ford Motor Co., coming out and saying they're against red heads marrying. It would go on the back pages, in the "News of the Weird" section.
That's where shit like this belongs, and until that's where it ends up and people pay it no more attention than as a source of fringe humor and entertainment when companies make announcements like this, we're still in the Stupid Ages of our future history books.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
>>>Chick-Fil-A has a rather affectionate relationship with its customers. Hard to see the same thing happening at McDonalds, never mind Microsoft.
Interesting. Maybe I ought to try this Chick-Fil-A business.
The ACLU has strongly criticized the mayors of Boston, Chicago, et cetera. They say if the government follows-through on blocking Chick-Fil-a then the ACLU will sue the local governments for discrimination against a business (or group) based upon its religious beliefs. Though I am pro-same sex marriage, I agree with teh ACLU that it is not the role of government to punish/boycott/ban people or businesses or groups for their speech or ideas.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Chic-Fil-A is a private company serving the interests of a private owner. Microsoft soft is a publicly held company which primarily exists to serve the interests of their shareholders.
The same sex marriage debate is divisive and there are strong beliefs on both sides. Does a public company exist to sell a product and provide a profit to its shareholders, or help enact social change even if it means the cost of business? Even if it hurts shareholders?
It simply does not make sense to take sides on a on a highly divisive social issue.
In Chic-Fil-A's case, Rahm Emmanuel shot his mouth off saying "Their values are not our values" and supported his alderman's postion to stop Chic--Fil-A from building a restaurant based on Chic Fil A's president stance on opposing same sex marriage. Which subsequently led to the anti-boycott and Chic-Fil-A's single biggest sales day in the history of the company Aug 1
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
I personally don't want to give my money to hate-mongers and bigots. Thats why. And I generally advocate that no one else should support assholes as well.
This appreciation day thing is creepy, since its supporting them just because they are run by an asshole. I'm glad that hatred can make you the money here in America, for no reason but for the fact that you hate someone who someone else hates. I find this depressing as hell.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
In January 2011, the media reported that the American fast food restaurant chain Chick-fil-A was co-sponsoring a marriage conference along with the Pennsylvania Family Institute (PFI), an organization that had filed an amicus brief against the trial ruling striking down Proposition 8 in California (see Perry v. Brown).[1][2][3][4][5] PFI had also lobbied against a state effort to ban discrimination in Pennsylvania on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.[6] Responding on its official company Facebook page, Chick-fil-A said that support of the PFI retreat had come from a local franchisee, stating "We have determined that one of our independent Restaurant Operators in Pennsylvania was asked to provide sandwiches to two Art of Marriage video seminars."[7]
Another organization connected to Chick-fil-A through financial support, the WinShape Foundation,[8] was also quoted as stating it would not allow same-sex couples to participate in its marriage retreats.[9] Chick-fil-A gave over $8 million to the WinShape Foundation in 2010.[10] Between 2003 and 2009, the WinShape Foundation gave more than $2 million to groups such as Focus on the Family and Eagle Forum that are politically active in opposing same-sex marriage and other gay rights issues.[11][12][13] Some of these groups are also listed and recognized as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center. [1]
Well, statistically speaking, since approx. 50% of Americans are opposed to same-sex marriage, you can no longer ever buy anything at all, because at least _someone_ whose salary is paid by the business probably opposes same sex marriage.
Look, I'm gay. Hell, I'm married to someone of the same sex. But I really think some of the pro-marriage activists in the U.S. are going off the freaking deep end. It's a complex issue which deeply divides your country (and many countries). Approaching it like a cartoon in which everyone who supports same-sex marriage is a glorious white knight and anyone who opposes it is evil and eats babies isn't really a mature approach. It's frankly disingenous, disrespectful, rude and counter-productive to imply that anyone who opposes same-sex marriage is necessarily a hate-mongering bigot. A lot of them aren't.
But then, this is America, where major sociopolitical issues are fought out in fast-food chicken restaurants.
The funny part? There is NO "biblical view of marriage" and in fact many of the great leaders of the bible had multiple wives. In fact most of the "traditions" we have of marriage are less than a century old and the ones that are older than that most would be horrified if they knew where they came from. An example, the throwing of the garter? Came from the middle ages when they would rip the clothes right off the "bride' who was usually outright bought and didn't have shit to say about the whole thing, to "loosen her up" before being drug off to the bedroom. Source.
So while there is plenty of precedent for hiding bigotry with the bible, both slavery and racism were considered defensible by scripture, to say its "biblical tradition" to have a single man and a woman is complete horseshit.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.