Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

General Mills boycott urged over marriage amendment stance
pioneer press ^ | 6-27-12 | julie forster

Posted on 06/27/2012 5:15:55 AM PDT by TurboZamboni

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: TurboZamboni

The best bet is not a boycott, but a targeted shareholder revolt.

A simple enough proposition: get a list of their major shareholders, and compare it to a list of political contributors, both of which are public domain information.

Select those shareholders who are regular contributors to conservative Republican campaigns, and send them targeted emails advising them that General Mills is *wasting* money on political causes instead of either improving the company’s bottom line or paying better stock dividends.

That is, *they*, the shareholders, are subsidizing this nonsense.


21 posted on 06/27/2012 9:37:04 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TurboZamboni

,,,, Count me in !


22 posted on 06/27/2012 11:08:48 AM PDT by Lionheartusa1 (-: Socialism is the equal distribution of misery :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I sent General Mills an e-mail today advising that my family is off Cheerios. It’s the only one of their products we use, but we did use it almost every day. Won’t hurt them, I know. But it sure makes me feel better.


23 posted on 06/27/2012 12:22:36 PM PDT by Godwin1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Godwin1

You may find out that unless you are growing and threshing your own cereal grains, the commercially available alternatives are similarly inclined.


24 posted on 06/27/2012 12:24:59 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; TurboZamboni; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; ...

” Dems have organized to launch boycotts of companies that donate to causes they disagree with, as well as Glenn Beck and Rush. Our side needs to give it a try.”

I agree


25 posted on 06/27/2012 1:18:50 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

What is wrong with the PLAIN truth ENGLISH, I wrote the thing in?

Since ENGLISH IS MY ONLY LANGUAGE, I can write in no other. I might misspell a word, but it is ENGLISH. Not texting, or what ever these kids do today in place of using ENGLISH.


26 posted on 06/27/2012 2:55:05 PM PDT by GailA (IF U don't/won't keep your promises to the Military, U won't keep them to the public)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: paul544
don't yet think conservatives realize that we've lost this and other such arguments. There's nothing left but the crying.

I posted the other day that folks missed the culture war. This is the reaping of the seed sown in the past two decades. Companies are just following the demographic realities of young, new customers.

27 posted on 06/27/2012 5:57:58 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TurboZamboni

I decided to buy the store brand toasted oat cereal the other day and found it was just as good as the official Cheerios. General Mills is free to support what it wants. I’m free to give my dollars to some other company(that as far as I know isn’t telling Minnesotans how to vote on anything) instead.


28 posted on 06/27/2012 10:09:16 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TurboZamboni

Instead of telling us the companies to avoid, why can’t an organization tell what companies PROMOTE family values, or are at least neutral?

Why do I have to go to HRC’s website to find this information?


29 posted on 06/27/2012 11:06:19 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nea Wood

MYTH: The Marriage Protection Amendment will damage Minnesota’s economy because those in the so-called “creative class” will shun our state.


FACT:

This argument shows how desperate same-sex marriage activists have become in attempting to advocate their position.

First, the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment makes no change to our existing law and thus would have no impact on our economy. It simply puts our current definition of marriage beyond the reach of activist judges and politicians to change it without the consent of voters.

This argument also is internally inconsistent with other arguments that gay marriage backers advance. For example, they argue that more gay and lesbian couples are making their home in Minnesota so we should redefine marriage to accommodate them, yet, if true, that is happening when we already define marriage as the union of one man and one woman!

On the face of it, it’s hard to imagine what connection economic performance might have to a state’s definition of marriage. However, to the extent that there is such a connection, the facts show that states with a marriage protection amendment in their state constitution are our top performing economic states.

For example, eight of the top ten “best states for business” according to a survey of 556 CEOs by Chief Executive Magazine have a state marriage amendment in their constitution.

Six of the top ten performing states for “creating jobs, economic development and prosperity in challenging times” have state marriage amendments in their constitutions, according to a study published by the National Chamber Foundation.

According to Moody’s Analytics, eight of the top ten states for job growth have a marriage amendment in their state constitution.

Finally, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in March that of the six states with the lowest unemployment rate, four of them had state marriage amendments.


30 posted on 06/28/2012 5:12:20 AM PDT by TurboZamboni (Looting the future to bribe the present)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Nea Wood

MYTH: The Marriage Protection Amendment will damage Minnesota’s economy because those in the so-called “creative class” will shun our state.


FACT:

This argument shows how desperate same-sex marriage activists have become in attempting to advocate their position.

First, the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment makes no change to our existing law and thus would have no impact on our economy. It simply puts our current definition of marriage beyond the reach of activist judges and politicians to change it without the consent of voters.

This argument also is internally inconsistent with other arguments that gay marriage backers advance. For example, they argue that more gay and lesbian couples are making their home in Minnesota so we should redefine marriage to accommodate them, yet, if true, that is happening when we already define marriage as the union of one man and one woman!

On the face of it, it’s hard to imagine what connection economic performance might have to a state’s definition of marriage. However, to the extent that there is such a connection, the facts show that states with a marriage protection amendment in their state constitution are our top performing economic states.

For example, eight of the top ten “best states for business” according to a survey of 556 CEOs by Chief Executive Magazine have a state marriage amendment in their constitution.

Six of the top ten performing states for “creating jobs, economic development and prosperity in challenging times” have state marriage amendments in their constitutions, according to a study published by the National Chamber Foundation.

According to Moody’s Analytics, eight of the top ten states for job growth have a marriage amendment in their state constitution.

Finally, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in March that of the six states with the lowest unemployment rate, four of them had state marriage amendments.


31 posted on 06/28/2012 5:20:16 AM PDT by TurboZamboni (Looting the future to bribe the present)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson