You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
General Mills joins St. Jude in opposing marriage amendment.
Could someone address the potential affects on retirement programs and social security. The actuaries that determined how much I should pay into my retirement for it to succeed took into account survivor benefits. If know a group will qualify for survivor benefits that was not accounted for in the actuaries scenerio will it affect adversly the sustainability of the program ?? Also, I am a single male. Could I marry my buddy and he would then inherit by assests without having to pay inheritance tax ??
Funny how being against the amendment makes you on the "right" side of the issue. Also, it's not an amendment banning same-six marriage - you can still get married, it just wouldn't be recognized in the law's eyes.
General Mills had little choice. They knew they would be boycotted otherwise. Those favoring gay marriage are very vocal and will trash and burn anyone who dares oppose them. This is not about a fair open discussion of a legitimate issue.
Riiiiiiiiight!! You are courageous if you agree with my cause, and you are a hater and a bigot if disagree with my cause. Is this person serious in writing this stuff??? This is nothing but shallow and hypocritical commentary.
It is merely a public relations move to keep the gay community happy... big deal. Saying nothing or stating they were against it would lead to so much negative press it is not worth it.
don50-"General Mills had little choice. They knew they would be boycotted otherwise. Those favoring gay marriage are very vocal and will trash and burn anyone who dares oppose them. This is not about a fair open discussion of a legitimate issue." ---- Hey, Don, there is absolutely nothing legitimate about the anti-gay point of view. Conservatives (and yes, it's conservatives) think it's outrageous that gay people should be granted the same rights as heterosexuals...then wave American flags and cheer about freedom and the military. How repugnant and hypocritical. Anyone who takes the viewpoint that marriage MUST be defined as ONLY between a man and a woman are free to think what they want. They are in the overwhelming minority of the population in 2012, but it's their right. HOWEVER, said people CANNOT assert that they love freedom and believe in justice. Because they don't. Obviously. There is no way to rationally talk around the fact that if you oppose gay marriage you fundamentally do not support freedom for all people. It's impossible to argue otherwise, actually. So THAT'S why the anti-gay position is not legitimate. If it's rationally impossible to reconcile with a stated belief, it CANNOT be valid. The homophobic conservatives who support this amendment are going to be RESOUNDINGLY bludgeoned into silence after their stupid amendment gets erased from the collective consciousness in November.
" Also, it's not an amendment banning same-six marriage - you can still get married, it just wouldn't be recognized in the law's eyes." ---- So what would be the point, then? Why would anyone get married if they don't get all the benefits afforded by such a union? Heterosexuals may very well marry for love just as much as gays do/will, except HETEROSEXUALS reap the benefits of a LEGALLY RECOGNIZED union. Is that simple enough to understand? It's always been about money, just like everything is. The GOP wants this right-to-work bill to pass too so that people can reap all the benefits of having union representation without paying for it...which ultimately will choke off the union's financial means to subsist and kill it over time. It's all about money. So by opposing gay marriage, you oppose equal rights.
No more General Mills cereals and food products for this large Catholic family. Looks like their downsizing is a result of their poor decision-making on many levels.
Its a business issue, pure and simple. Corporations need to attract top talent, top talent can go anywhere AND tends to have an affinity for tolerant communities, whether the top talent is gay or straight. Communities which are "gay friendly" are more likely to flourish in the new "creativity driven" economy. Intolerant communties will function at a disadvantage. good book to read on this is "The Rise of the Creative Class."
@AirForceGuy: You cannot deny someone something they can never have. You're saying that we are denying apples the right to be oranges, when they can't be. It is silly.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks