Skip to main content

I called and told the reservation agent why I was cancelling the reservation.  He was clueless about Prop 8 and did not even know that California had revoked gay marriage.

I was going to stay at a Marriott in LA this weekend.  But instead, I will be staying at a Starwood property instead.  Starwood is a net donor to the Democratic Party.

Marriott is clearly keeping an eye on this incipient boycott.

See a pretty unsatisfactory email from Marriott here:
http://www.americablog.com/...

And on Bill Marriott's blog:
http://www.blogs.marriott.com/...

See my earlier diaries for other businesses we should be boycotting.

Update 1: Follow the money.  Marriott Inc.'s profits flow to Bill.  Bill tithes to the Mormon Church 10% of his income.  The Mormon Church spent a lot of resources (cleverly, little real money) on sending mail to voters, organizing Church phone banks from Idaho and Utah, walking precincts, organizing transportation, setting up websites and other activity to support Prop 8.  Note that in Bill's blog, he never says that he opposed Prop 8 (either by word or deed).  We can only conclude that he allowed his tithing to be used by the Mormon Church to write discrimination into California's constitution.
http://www.americablog.com/...

Update 2: In a statement reported here:(http://www.sltrib.com/ci_10975491) Bill Marriott says: "The Bible that I love teaches me about honesty, integrity and unconditional love for all people," Marriott said. "But beyond that, I am very careful about separating my personal faith and beliefs from how we run our business."
Note the clever parsing of words.  He tries to leave the impression that he is opposed to Prop 8 ("love for all people") but he is speaking in code that is meant to appeal to whatever the listener wants to hear.  Nowhere does Bill Marriott say that he opposes Prop 8.  Furthermore, Marriott's press releases absolutely refuse to discuss the tithing issue: that dollars to Marriott become dollars to Bill and thus become dollars to the Mormon Church... which organizes anti-gay activity.

Now if Bill Marriott were to personally offset his tithing with a substantial and adequate donation to gay rights organizations, I will say call off the boycott.  Let's see if Marriott responds to this challenge.

Originally posted to Buster CT1K on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:55 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What did Bill Marriott say that didn't satisfy? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    linkage, Demi Moaned, The Bluest Sky

    As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

    by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 11:59:51 AM PST

  •  From Bill's blog (9+ / 0-)

    Neither I, nor the company, contributed to the campaign to pass Proposition 8.

    Even speaking as a Salt Lake City resident who has diaried in favor of a boycott of the state, this would seem to make a boycott of Marriott somewhat off-point.

    Or is he just lying?

    Vote for my plan to rebuild the GOP! http://ideas.rebuildtheparty.com/pages/general/suggestions/70890

    by Joe Beese on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:00:05 PM PST

    •  He contributes to the Mormon Church! (16+ / 0-)

      And the Mormon Church directed money to Prop 8!

      •  Do all your associations follow your views (8+ / 0-)

        to the letter?

        As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

        by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:08:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  This is the singular problem... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ogre, pgm 01, rf7777, matpatbat

        ...that I have with this whole boycott idea.

        If you want to boycott those businesses that contributed directly to pass Prop 8, go ahead.  You won't find me opposing a protest of those businesses, nor of the LDS or Catholic Churches, or any other religious entity which used the pulpit to promote it's passage.  They deserve it.

        But when you suggest boycotting people who belong to those churches, or businesses who hired someone who belonged to that church, you are entering dangerous waters.  Don't paint with such a broad brush, especially when you are doing so in the name of stopping bigotry.  You can't say "boycott all Mormons!" without a scary irony bleeding through.

        "Hey everybody, get a load of this flaming wreckage!" -- Chief Wiggum commenting on the end of McCain's campaign.

        by DH from MD on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:15:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Like it or not (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mattman, homogenius, ExStr8

          Yes on Prop 8 was funded by each and every tithing member of the LDS. I'm not painting Mormons with a broad brush because I genuinely believe there are some Mormons who may not have known how there tithes were being spent.
          Unfortunately, a portion of every dollar spent in Utah or in a Mormon owned business ends up in LDS coffers.  Why should we give ammunition to the firing squad?

          I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

          by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:32:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm an atheist (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ticket punch, bperk

            If I own a business, should others be allowed to boycott me because of that?  Even if I did nothing to directly affect their lives?  I'll go on record and say that most Mormons did not donate to their Church just to fuck up the lives of same-sex couples in California.

            "Hey everybody, get a load of this flaming wreckage!" -- Chief Wiggum commenting on the end of McCain's campaign.

            by DH from MD on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:42:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  And exactly who are you oppressing (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              homogenius, ExStr8

              as an atheist?  Do you give money to anti-religious groups?

              I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

              by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:49:47 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  And who exactly... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                bperk

                ...is the average Mormon oppressing?  Should I hold them responsible for the actions of their leaders, or should the leaders be the ones who bear the burden?

                My point is that I can't make judgments on people who I don't know, least of all in the name of tolerance.

                "Hey everybody, get a load of this flaming wreckage!" -- Chief Wiggum commenting on the end of McCain's campaign.

                by DH from MD on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:02:49 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I mentioned before (0+ / 0-)

                  Like it or not, each and every tithe-paying Mormon contributed to Yes on 8, whether they were consciously doing it or not.
                  I have zero influence in the Mormon church hierarchy.  Tithe-paying Mormons DO have influence.

                  I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

                  by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:11:31 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  My suspicion... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...is that we aren't convincing each other of anything, and I'd like to end this on a relatively civil note.

                    I would like to say that I do support the protests of any organization or businesses, secular or religious, that supported Proposition 8.  Good luck.

                    "Hey everybody, get a load of this flaming wreckage!" -- Chief Wiggum commenting on the end of McCain's campaign.

                    by DH from MD on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:19:41 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, tithing gives the group power, but (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ticket punch

                    it doesn't give any individual power.  One individual does not have the power to direct how the Mormon church is going to use their money.  In this way, paying taxes would make me responsible for everything the U.S. government decides to do with that money.

                •  What's an average Mormon? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Skylarking

                  Should I hold them responsible for the actions of their leaders?

                  In a word:  Yes.

                  Every time the 'average' Mormon tithes, even if they disagree with certain teachings of the church, they are complicit in opposing equal rights.  They have the CHOICE to remain members of their church or pick another faith.  Feeling bad about or disagreeing with what their church preaches does not make one an 'Average' Moromn.  There's no such thing as an 'average' Mormon. People of good conscience have quit their church over this battle.  That makes them former Mormons, not better-than-average Mormons.

                  My 'diaries' SUCK! But check 'em out anyway just to make sure.

                  by 4kedtongue on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:42:57 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Giving up their faith is too much to expect. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ticket punch, Skylarking

                    If that is the road you think is necessary to achieve our ends, we will never win.  People are not going to give up their faith.  We need to convince people that their faith requires treating people with respect and letting people live their lives.  There is nothing about the Mormon faith that is flawed, it is the leaders holding bigoted views.  Active Mormon members speaking out against such views is the answer, not an outright rejection of their faith (and really most faiths at this point).

                    •  I agree with you (0+ / 0-)

                      They shouldn't give up their faith.  But they should discontinue donations if they truly do not support Prop 8, or they should voice their opinion.  Which is exactly what I'm doing by boycotting.

                      I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

                      by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:59:18 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  But, you are boycotting a gay friendly business (0+ / 0-)

                        because someone who works their tithes to a church that is not gay-friendly.  Bill Marriott didn't give money directly, and LDS, as far as I can see, also didn't give money directly to support Prop 8.  They did support prop 8 as did Catholics.  How far are you going to take this boycott?  And what do you want Marriott, the company, to do to end the boycott?

                        •  Are they the only gay friendly business? (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Viceroy

                          You make it sound as if there are so few gay friendly businesses that we GLBT should be happy and just shut up.  And your assertion that LDS didn't not give money directly to support Prop 8 is contrary to AP and CNN.

                          I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

                          by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:39:01 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I can only find information that (0+ / 0-)

                            Mormons gave.  I can't find any info that they gave money directly.  Do you have a link?

                            I'm not saying that there are a shortage of gay friendly businesses.  I'm saying that boycotting gay friendly businesses who have employees that are not accomplishes nothing.  Marriott, the company, can't do anything to earn your business without violating the law by firing people who are Mormons.  Marriott, the company, has done what they can do to show that they are not the enemy in this fight.  Are you going to advocate a boycott of the Dodgers because Jeff Kent gave money to support Prop 8.  Kent gave his money directly, not by tithing, to support bigotry.

                          •  If the Dodgers (0+ / 0-)

                            as a group gave money to Yes on 8, I would boycott them.  You really don't understand the concept and purpose of a boycott.  Either that or you're being obtuse on purpose.

                            I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

                            by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:54:53 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Better analogy: If a Dodgers player (0+ / 0-)

                            gave money to support 8, and if you were a Dodgers fan, then what?

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 05:00:32 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Better Ananlogy... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...If George Steinbrenner gave money to 'yes' on 8, would I attend Yankees games?  

                            No, I wouldn't.

                            Furthermore, if I worked for Steinbrenner, I would quit...just like I would quit my church.  Just like I did quit my job waiting tables in a restaurant I worked in during college after overhearing the owner refer to an African-American dishwasher as a 'nigger'.  And I never ate there again either.  And I convinced every one of my friends NOT to eat there.

                            I didn't put the guy out of business, but I didn't support him either.  And before I walked out the door, I let him know WHY I was quitting, and that I planned to spread the word on campus to anyone who would listen to me.  I refuse to work for racists.  I refuse to do business with racists.

                            And if this were about any other 'minority' population, you wouldn't be here making your inane rationalizations.  You would be saying:  Yeah, there are plenty of hotel chains out there.  And I'm with you.

                            You're either being a contrarian for the sake of a good argument, or you're a completely unconcerned with the war being waged against the GLBT community -- and how it's being waged.

                            My 'diaries' SUCK! But check 'em out anyway just to make sure.

                            by 4kedtongue on Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 09:25:19 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I just don't feel comfortable (0+ / 0-)

                            singling out members of a religion for boycotts.  Marriott, the CEO, didn't support prop 8.  I can't find any evidence that he contributed one penny, despite his church's encouragement that its members do so.  He does send money to his church, which publicly and wrongly supports prop 8.  

                            I have no problem with boycotting orgs or people who supported prop 8.  In fact, I think it is a great idea.  I disagree that being a member of the Mormon church means that you must automatically be singled out as a supporter of prop 8, and, therefore, deserving of a boycott.  I think Marriott himself should be judged based on where he stands on the issue, not where the church stands.  People don't always agree with their church.  While you may feel comfortable leaving the church when you disagree, everyone does not.  I have never been a member of a church that I agree with 100% of the time.  Catholics use birth control way more than the church requires, and they just agree to disagree with their church.  All that to say, people do not always believe what their church believes.  A boycott should be directed at those who supported prop 8, not at members of any of the many churches who supported prop 8.  When you start boycotting anyone who is a Mormon because the church supports prop 8, it smacks of a different kind of discrimination and bigotry to me.

                          •  Are you suggesting that Marriott as an (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ticket punch

                            organization gave money to Yes on 8?  If that is true, then certainly a boycott is in order.  Marriott is a publicly traded company and hasn't given any money.  Further the chairman and CEO of Marriott, Bill Marriott, also did not give money to Yes on 8.  He does, however, give money to his church, which supported prop 8.  I don't think I am being obtuse, I just don't see what you hope to gain from Marriott the company.

                          •  Fine... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...in a nutshell, we don't hope to gain ANYTHING from Marriott the company.  Nothing.  We want nothing.  We do not want a place to stay when we're on vacation, we have the Hyatt for that.

                            What does the company hope to gain from us?

                            Well, I would say, bperk, if the Marriott Company wants my business, its board should have a little talk with its CEO...maybe ask him to consider stepping down and selling off his shares of stock because his very visible presence at the top of the company is starting to effect the bottom line.

                            That's all.  Until then, I'll stay at another hotel.

                            Is that ok with you?

                            My 'diaries' SUCK! But check 'em out anyway just to make sure.

                            by 4kedtongue on Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 09:33:51 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What you are suggesting is illegal. (0+ / 0-)

                            The Board cannot ask the CEO to step down because he is a member of the Mormon church.

                            Stay where you want.  I'd personally rather boycott those companies who gave money to support prop 8.

                    •  Expecting my business... (0+ / 0-)

                      ...is too much to expect.

                      It is not the road that I think is necessary, it is the road those who USED to belong to the church felt was necessary.  And I agree with them.

                      You may twist the logic all you want, but you can not have it both ways.

                      If you give money through tithing -- or directly through personal political contributions based on what your minister tells you your church requires of you -- you should not expect one red cent from me.  If you continue to associate yourself with a religion that endorses bigotry in contradiction of your personal views, which is your right, you can not expect me to want to do business with you -- which is my right.  Nor do you have the right to expect me to not discourage others from doing business with you.

                      Btw:

                      There is nothing about the Mormon faith that is flawed, it is the leaders holding bigoted views.

                      I COMPLETELY disagree with that statement...there are PLENTY of flaws.  One of which wasn't corrected until 1978 regarding blacks.  Give me a fucking break.  i don't give a shit if you don't drink coffee or abstain from alcohol or wear sexy, puritanical underwear...have at it.  The religion teaches bigotry...that's enough for me.

                      My 'diaries' SUCK! But check 'em out anyway just to make sure.

                      by 4kedtongue on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:06:52 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think LDS gave $ directly. (0+ / 0-)

            I think they told their members to give.  That is not the tithe money.

      •  Bill Marriott's 2007 comp. was $9.2 million (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ExStr8, craigkg, jgilhousen

        according to the graphic in this article

        http://projects.washingtonpost.com/...

        Bill Marriott says he tithes, so he gave about $920,000 to the LDS church last year.

        If people don't like that, they are free to boycott, just as they would be free to boycott a business whose CEO gives hundreds of thousands per year to James Dobson's "Focus on the Family".

        We are the change we've been waiting for.

        by MJB on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:17:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The Mormon Church told its members to donate to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ExStr8

        Prop 8.  I haven't read anything that they donated the church's donations to Prop 8.

    •  Please see update 1 above (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fritzrth, homogenius, ExStr8, craigkg, linkage
    •  the trib has story on this here (8+ / 0-)

      here

      ...
      For the past 20 years, Marriott International has had domestic-partner benefits and has earned a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index for two years in a row, Marriott said in a release.
      ...

  •  Excuse me? (11+ / 0-)

    What is Marriott guilty of other than being Mormon owned?

    Nothing. Pure guilt by association.

    This is akin to saying because hundreds of white people belong to the Klan, all Caucasians need to be punished. Flawed. Flawed. Flawed.

    I get the outrage over Prop. 8, but when you punish a business that didn't make a finanicial contribution, it's misguided and morally wrong.

  •  A boycott is still appropriate (8+ / 0-)

    Don't fool yourself.  The Marriott family has deep ties with the church and pays 10% of their income to the chruch---  helping to fund anti-gay efforts in CA and other states.  

    •  Boycotts don't work. Don't fool yourself. n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VinBacchus

      As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

      by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:04:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Some do; some don't... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ticket punch, BFSkinner

        Are you opposed to all boycotts or just this one?

        "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

        by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:52:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Pretty much all, except in the most local (0+ / 0-)

          and most concentrated instances. Marriott's customer base and commercial "footprint" are too large and diffuse for any buying action to have any meaningful effect. Effort is better spent elsewhere.

          As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

          by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:57:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe; maybe not... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ExStr8, Buster CT1K

            Given that you support some boycotts, surely there is room in your mind to respect the views of others who would support this idea.  Some times, merely the threat of a boycott can change behavior - in any event, it has already generated awful pr for Marriott, which is already a partial success; your blithe dismissal notwithstanding.

            Right now, we're lashing out at anyone and everyone who would deny us equal protection of our civil rights.  I applaud the diarist's passion and his sense of justice.  Even if Marriot is completely blameless, it is helpful for them to get the message not to discriminate and for them and their execs to be wary of joining causes that deny fundamental civil rights.

            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:16:35 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  "Blithe dismissal"? You made that up. (0+ / 0-)

              Where did I put that tube of Troll-Be-Gone?

              As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

              by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:18:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  huh? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ticket punch, bperk, matpatbat

              Some times, merely the threat of a boycott can change behavior

              What behavior of Marriott Corporation are we trying to change?  The company did not support Prop 8.  They are a gay friendly company that is a leader in workplace equality for LGBTs.  What behavior or result are we trying to get here by boycotting them.  Laying off workers?  They have over 150,000 employees of which I am guessing MANY MANY are gay.  

              •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)

                Are you disagreeing with my statement that "some times, merely the threat of a boycott can change behavior?"  Why do you disagree?  Are you asserting that corporations and countries take actions completely dismissive of the potential consequences from trade competitors??  That is a really strange argument...

                If I were a corporate lawyer for Marriott, I would endeavor to assure that the actions (or perceived actions) of my client did not upset vast swaths of potential customers by denying them civil rights.  That would include any real or perceived ties which senior management maintained with religious organizations active in the public sphere.  My response might be to ensure that all employment practices are indeed as gay-friendly as you allege; I might even initiate an internal investigation to verify that (which would receive senior management attention).  Depending on how senior I was, I might even have a conversation with senior management about their real or perceived ties with discriminatory religious organizations; I might even recommend that the corporation buy out all outstanding shares from such senior management to avoid even the appearance of the stain of bigotry; I might even recommend an increase in the advertising budget directly targeting the (real or perceived) offended targeted customer base.

                Lots of actions can result from mere threats of boycotts.  Pretending that they can't or don't doesn't strike me as an intelligent response.

                "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:44:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  If you were a lawyer, you would know that you (0+ / 0-)

                  can't discriminate against any employees based on their religion.  That is what any boycott would try to enforce - a no Mormonism rule at Marriott.

                  •  Hardly... (0+ / 0-)

                    The actions I described as possible responses by a Marriott lawyer fall far short of a "no Mormonism" policy.  Try reading them!

                    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                    by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:57:23 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Buying out the shares of managers (0+ / 0-)

                      because they have ties to religion is illegal.

                      •  No it's not... (0+ / 0-)

                        Counter-parties buy and sell securities every single day for any number of reasons and it most certainly is not illegal.  Try again - you've read one of them (and none of them would constitute a "no Mormonism" policy).

                        "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                        by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:05:17 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Buying out the shares of managers means they (0+ / 0-)

                          lose their jobs because of their religion.  How is that legal?

                          •  No it doesn't... (0+ / 0-)

                            Buying shares means you buy shares.  Employment relations are a completely separate matter.  Individuals in inside (or outside) management or directorship positions can sell their shares to their employer corporation and maintain their lucrative jobs.  It happens all the time and, most certainly, is NOT illegal.  Try again.

                            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:19:10 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This is making no sense. (0+ / 0-)

                            Are you going to put them on a special list, so they get no further shares?  And, buying their shares at a set price when they could get more if they held on to them longer is discrimination anyway.

                          •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)

                            No special list.  Sell at market price.  Not illegal.

                            I really think you should read up on securities laws.

                            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:28:50 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And if the managers refuse to sell? (0+ / 0-)

                            Then what?

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:29:28 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You need to read some employment law. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ticket punch

                            You cannot force employees to do something like sell their shares based on their religion.  That is discrimination based on their religion, and it is illegal.  If you are giving stock to your employees, but don't give it to the Mormons, that is also illegal.  If you are having a party and don't include the Mormons that is illegal.  You can't make your Mormon employees take special classes on not being bigots either.

                          •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)

                            Who said anyone is "forced" to do anything?  Your reading comprehension skills need some work.  Why do you make stuff up like that?  Are you interested in civil conversation?

                            Your "no Mormonism" assumption was (and remains) erroneous no matter how many posts you re-iterate it in.  Try again.

                            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:37:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What's that? Speak English. n/t (0+ / 0-)

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:42:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  If they refuse to sell their Marriott shares, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            bperk

                            then what?

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:43:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And this quote. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ticket punch

                            I might even recommend that the corporation buy out all outstanding shares from such senior management to avoid even the appearance of the stain of bigotry

                            This suggestion is still illegal.

                          •  No it's not... (0+ / 0-)

                            Like I said many many posts above, counter-parties (including management) willingly buy and sell shares every day.  Your failure to grasp this rather simple concept is illustrative.

                            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:47:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What happens when both parties aren't "willing"? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            bperk

                            It's a simple question.

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:50:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  A corporation buying (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ticket punch

                            the shares of senior managers because they are mormons is a violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  I don't understand how you fail to grasp that.

                          •  No it's not... (0+ / 0-)

                            because the buyers and sellers would be willing.  Again, no matter how many times you say it, your "no Mormonism" assumption is just as erroneous as the first time you posted it.

                            Pretending that I advocated forcing someone against their will to do something is a baldfaced lie.  If you continue to argue with your strawman to the exclusion of what I actually say, you will forever label youself as a baldfaced liar.

                            Why the continual posts?  Why the refusal to address the substantive points I raised??  You argue in circles and refuse to address anything other than your own wrong assumption-based belief.

                            Why do your persist in your ignorance?

                            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:58:14 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  WHO SAYS the managers would be "willing" (0+ / 0-)

                            to sell their Marriott shares?

                            What if they're unwilling? What then?

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:00:37 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Then one of my four suggested (0+ / 0-)

                            actions by a Marriott corporate lawyer would have failed.  There are several other available options - too bad nobody read them ar made a serious comment about them.

                            "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                            by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:06:37 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The lawyer comes to chat. I say no. What then? (0+ / 0-)

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:09:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're absolutely wrong. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ticket punch

                            You don't know what you are talking about and are becoming more strident about your point.  If Mormons are "offered" the opportunity to sell their stock, prepare yourself for a lawsuit.  What does willing even mean when your employer wants you to do something?

                            As to my "no Mormonism" statement, I have never heard of a company buying stock from their managers and keeping them on.  The whole point of managers having stock is to make them more productive.  I was assuming that buying stock from their employees was akin to firing them, which would be sending a message of no Mormonism.  The situation that you are positing where a company buys back their stock from a particular group, but keeps them on is not one that happens in the real world as far as I have ever heard.  

            •  As the diarist, I say... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Viceroy

              Thank you for your applause!  Much appreciated.

  •  I find this campaign to be a bit racist (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EntrWriter, VinBacchus, tbrucegodfrey
  •  I've been mad at Marriott (6+ / 0-)

    since Katrina.  Some of their employees ended up at a shelter here in Dallas, and I ended up helping them.  Had to pay $25 a night for a room (I know that's cheap, but it should have been free).  I didn't think the company treated the people very well at all.  Some of the evacuees had worked for the company for 5 years, and all of them had been stuck staying during the hurricane because they had been asked to work.

    The best is the enemy of the good. --Voltaire

    by pateTX on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:03:41 PM PST

    •  that would be grounds for a boycott (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ticket punch

      I certainly think that if a company is exploiting its workers that would be grounds for not patronizing them- the reason I don't shop at Wal Mart.

      However, is the accepted standard of labor practice that business is responsible for its employees if they are victims of a natural disaster. Is the employer responsible for housing and feeding them. I think not. So lets not hold somebody to higher standard because we don't like what their church did.

  •  In this economy, one reservation actually matters (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fritzrth, ExStr8, KentuckyKat

    so this might have some impact if more people do this and make sure they know why.

  •   I'm glad I took the opportunity to read this (7+ / 0-)

    diary carefully (I'm a Marritt Rewards Gold member) because I was ready to cancel my reservations. Marriott is a publicly traded corporation. If the information available via the links is accurate, they have no culpability in the passage of Prop 8.

    "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

    by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:06:23 PM PST

    •  Mariott money goes to Mormons!!! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fritzrth, sternsieger, KentuckyKat
      •  You keep saying that like it means something. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VinBacchus, Ellinorianne

        Maybe a few dozen more iterations would help . . .

        As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

        by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:09:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The Mormon church supported Prop 8 big time (4+ / 0-)

          The Church "suggested" members give to Prop 8.

          •  OK, that's 1. 35 more to go. n/t (0+ / 0-)

            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:13:55 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  More than that. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ExStr8

            The mormon church has declared war on LGBT people. Their members provided most of the funding for the lies that aired on television.

            "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

            by homogenius on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:02:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes they have (0+ / 0-)

              The mormon church has declared war on the LGBT community, but it doesn't follow that all Mormons have done so.  "Members provided most of the funding" is not the same thing as "most members provided funding".
              For the record, I won't be patronizing Marriot, but I think "boycott fever" needs to be matched by outreach and support to those Mormons who opposed prop 8, such as Mormons For Marriage and others.  These are the people in a position to change the church's stand in the long term, and simply using the rule "Paid tithing = bigot" could lose us some valuable allies.

          •  Should we also boycott all businesses that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            matpatbat

            financially benefit someone who is Catholic if leaders in the Catholic church supports politically offensive measures?  Where does it end?  How about focusing on the people who really were directly spearheading the proposition.  Or, better yet, how about focusing on what we can do to get the proposition tossed and prevent this from happening again.  Sorry, but I think boycotting businesses like the Marriott just comes across as irrational to people and does not help the credibility of those trying to put a stop to measures like Prop 8.

      •  I actually felt similarly about Domino's, (8+ / 0-)

        because their owner was a big contributor to anti-choice campaigns.  My money was better spent elsewhere.

        Now, I don't buy Domino's because I don't want to run to the bathroom 30 minutes later.

        "You only live once. Let's keep trucking. If we don't do that, who's going to do it for us? We have to be happy. Why hate?" - Anthony Acevedo, WWII veteran

        by Black Leather Rain on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:10:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I totally agree about Domino's, and all RCC (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fritzrth, craigkg, jgilhousen
        •  I was waiting for Domino's to come up. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Black Leather Rain

          Tom Monaghan cashed out of Domino's years ago. He doesn't even show up under the "beneficial ownership" list, which means that he owns - at the very most - less than 5% of the company. I suspect he's all the way out, but <5% is all I can prove.</p>

          As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

          by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:12:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, I agree - that's why my reason (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ticket punch, jgilhousen, KentuckyKat

            for not buying Domino's now is just because it wreaks absolute havoc on my digestive system.  There was, however, a time when I could process it reasonably well but didn't buy it because of Monaghan.

            "You only live once. Let's keep trucking. If we don't do that, who's going to do it for us? We have to be happy. Why hate?" - Anthony Acevedo, WWII veteran

            by Black Leather Rain on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:14:46 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Ask for the thin crust. Way better, but I get (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Black Leather Rain

              what you mean about the digestion thing. Domino's is a very occasional treat these days.

              As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

              by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:17:17 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I don't think the crust is the problem - (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ticket punch, KentuckyKat

                could be wrong about that, though.  There always seems to be a thick layer of grease on any Domino's pizza I order (no matter what type), and I think that may be related to my issue.

                Kinda sad that I don't do Domino's anymore, too.  Back in college, I used to order a batch of cheesesticks and a pepperoni pizza for a friend and myself, and we would sit, munch, and talk about god knows what until the sun came up :D

                That reminds me.. I should facebook him.

                "You only live once. Let's keep trucking. If we don't do that, who's going to do it for us? We have to be happy. Why hate?" - Anthony Acevedo, WWII veteran

                by Black Leather Rain on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:21:45 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Mormons are people, too. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ellinorianne

        You're fighting the wrong enemy. And losing the war in the process.

        "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

        by MsWings on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:11:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Mormons may have founded the chain of hotels, but (7+ / 0-)

        the the stock is publicly trade (which means anyone who has a pension, or a mutual fund may be invested in the stock).

        "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

        by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:12:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ever heard of South Africa boycott? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          craigkg, sternsieger
          •  Yes, but that boycott was against companies (3+ / 0-)

            supporting the South African regime through trade.  What you're suggesting is to punish a publicly traded corporation because the founder's religious faith has taken a political stand against civil rights for all citizens. Like I said in another post, if it turns out Marriott execs have supported Prop 8, then you can tell the corporation that they must go.

            "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

            by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:20:39 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  He's still a principle owner (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ExStr8

              The family still owns a substantial share of the company. They benefit directly from the hotels and in turn use that money for a nefarious purpose. If the family were to "cash out" of the company ala Monaghan at Domino's, this wouldn't be an issue. This is about choking support off for the Mormon church political action committee. If Marriott wants to stop the boycott or the bad press, buy him out and show they are not a company that  agrees with their principle stockholders.

              There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

              by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:55:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm sure the Marriott family owns stock in other (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                VinBacchus, ticket punch

                publicly traded corporations, do you think it would be reasonable to boycott them as well?  Keep in mind, the only reason you're even considering this boycott is because of the family's Mormon faith and the fact that the Mormon church supported Prop 8.  What would you do if they were Catholic?  The Catholic Church has all but come out publicly to support Prop 8.  This is not productive.  You're using a machete where a scalpel would be more useful.

                "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

                by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:25:09 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I already withhold donations (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Buster CT1K

                  to Catholic charities on the basis of the Catholic churches bigotry towards GLBT's and women. Actually there are several charities that I specifically will not give to because they 1) are fronts for bigoted churches and/or 2) were advocates or supporters of Bush's "faith-based initiatives" that would allow them to proselytize to those they help or even withhold assistance on the basis of the potential recipient's faith.

                  I'd feel the same way if he were Catholic, Episcopalian, Jewish, Muslim or Wiccan. The difference here is that Marriott is still a substantial shareholder in Marriott hotels. If there were other companies in which he is a substantial shareholder, I'd likely boycott them too. When it comes to institutions insulated from effect of political votes, the only way of "voting against" those institutions, corporations and churches, is by voting with your dollars. You make something bad for business and the bottom line, the churches and corporations will change by themselves.

                  Marriott hotels could buy him out or counter their bigoted founder's family by actively opposing anti-gay ballot measures. The fact that Marriott hotels has been relatively friendly to the GLBT community is not that surprising given 1) the (only partially justified) stereotype that GLBT's are richer and travel more and 2) that as a major corporation, the absence of pro-equality policies would be bad for business as most of the Fortune 500 has learned. Being seen as bigoted is very bad PR. This is a case where they have to go above and beyond the call because of their bigoted namesake.

                  There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

                  by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:46:10 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Not exactly... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VinBacchus

              During the long tenure of apartheid, the "boycott" you describe took many forms and gradually escalated as to its targets.  At first, merely the RSA and its parastatal organizations were targeted for a boycott.  Then, that extended to corporations that did business in South Africa but which did not ratify the Sullivan principles.  Then, it was extended to corporations that did business with the South African government (or their parastatal industries).  Then, the boycott was extended to those corporations that did business with any South African entity and did not ratify the Sullivan principles.

              Then, the boycott was extended to those corporations that that did business with any South African entity whatsoever; irrespective of the Sullivan principles.  At its apex, the boycott targeted publically traded corporations (such as Motorola and Coke), cities and other third parties who did business with anyone who did business with anyone in the RSA.

              When you describe the "boycott" against the RSA, at what point in its history are you basing your analysis?  What should be the point of boycotts - to be effective or to satisfy your at-the-moment sensibilities?  

              "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

              by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:06:56 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Excellent history, but unless you can point to an (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                VinBacchus, ticket punch

                instance where a corporation was boycotted because it's leader shared a religion with the leaders of the RSA regime, I think my statement is reasonable.

                "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

                by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:29:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  It went much further than that... (0+ / 0-)

                  The boycotts against South Africa went far beyond merely that level of association - it targeted cities and corporations for mere tertiary associations which were much more greatly attenuated than your example.  Motorola was targeted because it did business with a private Sullivan-principle adherent counter-party that had no ties to the RSA whatsoever.  Cities were targeted because they merely deposited funds with banks that maintained mere correspondent relationships with private Sullivan-principle-adherent banks that had no ties to the RSA whatsoever.

                  Once again I ask - what point in the South Africa boycott are you describing?  At its most tertiary application, the South Africa boycott went far beyond what is being proposed here.  Was that boycott unjustifiable?  Why?

                  "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                  by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:55:17 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Let's get to the point. Is it your opinion, that (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    VinBacchus, Ellinorianne

                    Marriott Corporation should be boycotted because it's founding family shares the Mormon faith? Because this is the only connection between Marriott and Prop 8.

                    "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

                    by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:59:46 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Why do you refuse to answer questions? (0+ / 0-)

                      I've asked you pointed questions in each post and you ignore them all and then demand that I answer your question.  Why is that?  Do you have any answers to my questions?  At what point in the South Africa boycott are you referring - the start-up where it was in line with your sensibilities or the tertiary aspect where it presumably wasn't?  Do you think that these questions should be ignored?  Why?  Do you think that ignoring questions is conducive to civil discourse?  Why?

                      To address your question, I am not boycotting Marriott, but I do not oppose the completely legal threats of others to do so because they might result in positive action (or at the least no negative actions) from Marriott.  

                      Why do you so loudly oppose this diary?  Isn't pressuring Marriott to be even more gay-friendly likely to result in even a further attentuation of Marriott from this sort of issue?   Seriously, why did this diary get so many dismissive comments?

                      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

                      by Viceroy on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:12:44 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  If there are any records indicating members of (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rf7777

        the Marriott family, executives of the corporation, supported Prop 8, then it would be appropriate to pressure the corporation.

        "Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo

        by lordcopper on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:15:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Have you no sense of decency? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Samulayo

        Apparently not, Senator McCarthy.

        "2009" The end of an error

        by sheddhead on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:15:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Did you read the url you link to? (10+ / 0-)

    As many of you may know I'm a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some might conclude given my family's membership in the Mormon Church that our company supported the recent ballot initiative to ban same sex marriage in California. This is simply untrue. Marriott International is a public company headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, and is not controlled by any one individual or family. Neither I, nor the company, contributed to the campaign to pass Proposition 8.

    So why post this diary?

  •  Great. Now is the time to support equal rights (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fritzrth, homogenius, linkage, KentuckyKat

    for all Americans.

    I just posted a similar comment elsewhere but I think we need to up the amperage on this vitil civil rights issue.

    Yesterday, someone here refuted comparisions to the civil rights issues.   How can anyone say this isn't a civil rights issue?

    And the problem isn't just the extreme right wing zealots.  

    We need to up the pressure on those in our own leadership who will only support civil unions and not full equality.  

    AAs of all folks should recognize the harm, and bogus nature, of the seperate but equal argument.

    Either everyone get marriage from the government, or everyone gets civil unions.  Too many federal tax and other benefits are doled out to married couples.  

    Churches can do what they like under the 1st amendment, but government needs to follow the 14th amendment.

    Leaders who do not upgrade their positions quickly will not be remembered well.

    We've had a tacit de-facto waiver in effect for the last 24 years, and here since DKOS inception, under the presumption that we had to ask the GLBT to keep sitting in the back of the bus, in order to win elections and regain power.  

    And wait on these sensitive issues like GLBT and FISA until the public is more ready.  OK.  I accepted the "pragmatists" positions and stood down.  Now when are you all going to come foward and say now is a great time to restart these discussions.  When would be a better time?

    If not now when?  If not us, who?

    So I think this excuse is now officially over.  

    In retrospect, I'm  sort of ashamed of myself for accepting and supporting this GLBT compromise for so long and apologize to the GLBT if I was wrong about this compromise in the past.  We may have done the right thing on FISA, I'm still open minded on that.  At least, we are all suffering any compromise of our 4th amendenment rights equally.  And there are a whole lot of unknowable and murky caveats with national security, which may imply at some point we have to trust our leaders.

    I trust Obama to do the right thing on these national security issues.  At least, for a while.   But would ask him, and our other Democratic leaders to come foward and help us now, with this timely civil rights issue.

    Can there be a question any longer, that now is the right time for all of us to step up to the plate and consumate our great civil rights movement.

    I hope and pray Obama upgrades his position to support full equality for all Americans, before the inaugerations, so we can all celebrate without an ugly cloud hanging over us.  

    Like those of us who got our rights are feasting, while we turn our backs on our GLBT brothers and sisters, and let them starve looking through the windows, after they helped get our freedoms.  Sort of embarrassing.  

    Maybe we will need to wear black, or rainbow armbands at the inaugerations, to symbollically communicate that, at least some of us, will not ask them  to sit quitely in the back of the bus forever.  And make further mockery of Dr King's inspiration philosophy of liberation and equality for all Americans.  

    Because, if we do, I fear it will not be long before those snarky Repugs suggest that "the fierce urgency of now, has been redefined to mean, "I got mine, now you get yours, but you're own your own."

    Let's do the right thing and support equal rights for all Americans with no exceptions.  And honor the traditions of the great humanist and champions of civil rights and humanist like King and Gandhi.

    Now.

    The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

    by HoundDog on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:09:34 PM PST

  •  lets get the facts (9+ / 0-)

    did Bill Marriott or the chain advocate for Prop 8 or contribute to its passage?

    If not then are we not guilty of what we have criticized the Republicans for - "guilt by association". I understand that catholic Bishops objected to Prop 8. Should we boycott all catholic owned businesses as well.

  •  Marriott's PAC (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pager, Ellinorianne

    Contributes to Republicans, conservative Dems, and the occasional liberal Dem.

    Opensecrets page

  •  Think about this really (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VinBacchus, Pager, rf7777

    You don't just punish Marriott with a boycott and urging one.  Many of the people who work for the company didn't support 8.

    I think your follow the money is flawed and that just because Marriott tythes doesn't mean he supports 8.  He's following his religion and to boycott just based on that is offensive to me.

    We really have to be careful on how far we're willing to push this, too far and your just as bad as they are.

    Mr. Ellinorianne for CA State Senate! (Gary Pritchard ActBlue CA-SD-33)

    by Ellinorianne on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:11:46 PM PST

    •  His "religion" strongly supported Prop 8 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fritzrth, sternsieger
      •  His religion also says not to drink (6+ / 0-)

        And they serve caffeine and alcohol at Marriott hotels.  

        Marriott Sr. was much more strict and straight than Bill Jr.  They didn't have any hotels in Vegas or Atlantic City for the longest time, out of the desire not to profit from sin.  But businessmen prevailed, and nowadays they've got hotel bars and suite hotels two blocks from the strip.

      •  So? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drmonkey, think2004, CocoaLove
        There are many Mormons that don't support Prop 8.  Stop lumping them altogether.  It's so black and white and it's much more complicated than that.

        I'm sorry you are not getting the pat on the back that you might have been looking for in doing this but I really think the guilt by association thing is not the road we want to go down.

        He didn't support it, that's the end of it.  The point is to target people who did support it financially.  This is not the case here.

        Mr. Ellinorianne for CA State Senate! (Gary Pritchard ActBlue CA-SD-33)

        by Ellinorianne on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:17:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's not so black and white (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BFSkinner

          is what I mean.  And boycotting such a big chain hurts employees more than it would ever hurt someone like Marriott.  

          Not that I think your one reservation would matter.

          Mr. Ellinorianne for CA State Senate! (Gary Pritchard ActBlue CA-SD-33)

          by Ellinorianne on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:18:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  "pat on the back "? (0+ / 0-)

          Wow--that just doesn't sound like you. I've never known you to be that condescending. You might want to rethink that because...dayum.

          "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

          by homogenius on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:06:12 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I just think it (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ticket punch, matpatbat

            goes too far.  I would hate to see Mormons that did not support this bill unfairly targeted.  I believe No on 8 is absolutely right but I also think that if we go too far and punish people unfairly like this, then there will be an even bigger backlash and draw sympathy to those who supported the bill.

            It's a really fine line.  I was highly annoyed by this and probably responded too tersely, I just hate to see any group unfairly targeted.  We really need to focus on the people who funded Yes on 8, not just those who happen to be Mormon.

            Mr. Ellinorianne for CA State Senate! (Gary Pritchard ActBlue CA-SD-33)

            by Ellinorianne on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:18:09 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well, there are different angles to this. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ticket punch

              Certainly opinions are softening after a weeks passage of time and probably will more.

              But the hurt is fresh. The lds church declared war on me and other LGBT people. Those who support it with their tithes, time, and talents are not my friends. They can't be.

              For the first time we have removed a civil right at the constitutional level. This is horrendous.

              It's too bad if lds members feel put upon, but then it's not their ox being gored. Please pardon me if I can't find too much concern for their feelings.

              "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

              by homogenius on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:10:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm sorry (0+ / 0-)

                it's just wrong to lump any one group together.  I know of many awful lies about the Homosexual community that are disgusting as people lump all gays and lesbians together.

                I'm appalled that we even have to fight this, the fact that a "vote" is enough to amend the constitution is so wrong on many levels.

                And I can't say I understand, I don't, I'm not gay, so I won't say I get it, I can't.

                But to be called a Mormon troll?  Fine.

                Mr. Ellinorianne for CA State Senate! (Gary Pritchard ActBlue CA-SD-33)

                by Ellinorianne on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 06:01:08 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Two down, 34 to go. n/t (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ellinorianne

        As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

        by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:17:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry, I disagree. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ExStr8, craigkg

      I believe everyone has the right to spend their own money as they see fit.

      Spending money at one of his hotels puts money in Mr. M's pocket. He donates a portion to his church. I really don't wish to contribute even one dollar, even indirectly, to that organization.

      Mr. M's view on Prop. 8 is of no interest to me, if he continues to financially support the Mormon church.

      •  Marrott the business (9+ / 1-)

        should be judged on their treatment of gays and lesbians, which from what I understand is impeccable, a 100 rating!

        According to the HRC, Marriott Hotels is one of the best businesses to gay and lesbian issues.  This is what the business should be based on, not the personal religion of the owner, which isn't even the case, it's publicly owned and not a sole proprietorship.

        I urge people to think this through before unfairly targeting businesses.

        Mr. Ellinorianne for CA State Senate! (Gary Pritchard ActBlue CA-SD-33)

        by Ellinorianne on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:26:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The HRC (0+ / 0-)

          is an effete and ineffective organization, whose composite scores were good in the '90s when the forefront issues were workplace equality and nondiscrimination.

          However, if we were to apply a 2008 standard of whether a corporation's revenues are ultimately directed at pro-gay or anti-gay causes, Marriott would score much lower.

          •  So now we're trashing Human Rights Campaign? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Ellinorianne

            Incredible.

            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

            by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:45:17 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um, HRC is not a very popular org among many gays (0+ / 0-)

              They are not a grind-it-out-and-fight organization like many of our other advocate orgs like Lambda Legal, Natl Center for Lesbian Rights or the Natl Gay & Lesbian Task Force. HRC is also known for burning through money like all get out hosting glitzy galas that end up costing more money than they raise and do nothing to advance the cause, but they do make the hetero-liberals that buy tickets and go feel better about themselves.

              There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

              by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:06:30 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  "Many"? Weasel word. How many? n/t (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Number5

                As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

                by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:10:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You should get out more (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  pico

                  Bring of the topic of HRC's effectiveness on some gay boards or blogs and watch the flames coming it. They are not effective and are not well liked in may segments of the GLBT community in a way that can't be said with the other GLBT orgs. If you expect some sort of polling data to back it up, sorry, I can't provide any, but the anecdotal evidence is available far and wide. HRC likely would have ceased to exists were it not for a few very, very rich patrons of the org and the fact they have a cool logo that entices many to join.

                  There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

                  by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:17:34 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Very many. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Marja E

                  Weasel word or not, it's a fact.  You can start with the transgender community, and extend that dissatisfaction into communities of color and lower incomes.  They took quite the (deserved) trashing after the ENDA debacle, but they've already been somewhat in decline with activists - ironically as they've become more powerful as a lobby.

                  Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

                  by pico on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 07:25:52 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

          Can you point to any contributions or sponsorships Marriott Hotels has done for the GLBT community outside of simple marketing. There is a widely held perception that gays have more money and travel more (though the data that says this has greatly been questioned and the perception is likely way over blown). That said, for a entity like Marriott to not have a good GLBT business practices would be enormously detrimental to their business. If you look at the HRC report, you will see that Hotels, resorts and casinos category has one of the highest average scores and most of the drag on its average is one corporation.

          There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

          by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:02:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Good for you! Thanks! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Viceroy, jgilhousen

    I had a gym membership at the Marriott in Chicago and will not be renewing it for the same reason! The Marriott family may contribute to other anti-gay causes, but the fuckers won't be doing it with my money!

  •  Marriott has been great in (11+ / 0-)

    workplace equality for the LGBT community!!  They have scored 100s on HRC's Corporate Equality Index.  From what I know, neither their directors nor the company directly donated to Prop 8.  Shitting on them now makes no sense.

    I believe in boycotting businesses and people who donated directly to Prop8.  I strongly do not believe in this unfocused and unwise witch hunt against anyone or anything remotely involved with the LDS Church.

  •  Profoundly stupid suggestion. (6+ / 0-)

    As someone boycotting on this issue... it's important to boycott strategically.

    Boycotting ALL Mormons and all businesses substantially by Mormons simply ensures that they feel picked on.  It pushes them together and punishes them as a class.

    That's criminally stupid behavior.

    Target businesses that are owned by the LDS Church.  Target donors to Yes on 8 (Mormon and non-).

    Reward those Mormons who may have opinions you don't agree with but who didn't FUND propaganda, lies and deceit.  And no, the LDS church didn't fund it--they squeezed their members to fund it. So you REALLY DO WANT TO REWARD THOSE THAT DID NOT FUND IT--and punish those that did.  Next time around, they'll avoid the pain.

    [When] the land... has become private property, the landlords... love to reap where they never sowed, and demand rent even for its natural produce. ~Adam Smith

    by ogre on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:17:10 PM PST

    •  Pretty low bar (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ogre

      reward them for NOT taking our rights away?  You're not SUPPOSED to take someone's rights away!  Marriage in CA was legal, and over 18,000 couples were married.
      Are you saying we need to seek out the fairly low portion of the 2% of the population of CA, and build a coalition with them?  Even that small portion of that 2% are shrugging and saying "Not me.  Didn't do it.  It was my church. I've got no influence."
      And they continue to give a portion of income to the same church.
      I would never suggest someone give up their faith, but they CAN voice an opinion.  Something many apologists on this diary REFUSE to do.

      I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

      by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:28:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm a pragmatic idealist. (0+ / 0-)

        I want those rights back for you, and for others.

        If it means being civil to people who didn't donate to Yes on 8 and maybe even voted No, despite their church telling them otherwise... yeah, I can gag that down in the cause of justice.

        And my wife and I will cough up another $2000 or so to help get those rights back, and I'll phone bank, and try to persuade the evangelical neighbors again, too.

        Cutting one's nose off to spite one's face is only so satisfying.  Offering serious offense to people who didn't hurt you and are distressed that the majority of their fellow believers did... well, in my book that's self-destructive and stupid.

        [When] the land... has become private property, the landlords... love to reap where they never sowed, and demand rent even for its natural produce. ~Adam Smith

        by ogre on Fri Nov 14, 2008 at 11:29:02 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  This thread is a trainwreck (6+ / 0-)

    Please, for all that is good, let's stop beating up each other and focus on repealing these putrid amendments. Right now we only hurt each other. Consider the real enemy.

    Just a thought.

    -7.38, -5.23 I voted for Barack Obama at 8:31 a.m. EDT on Oct. 24. What about you? Go Obama/Biden 2008!

    by CocoaLove on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:18:22 PM PST

  •  I am all for protests, boycotts, etc. (5+ / 0-)

    I supported the action in Lansing as well.

    However I do not think a boycott here is right.

    I would support this if Mariott was NOT a pubilicy traded company. But since it is I do not see why a boycott would be needed as in the end I see this, if it would work harming more the day to day hotel workers who might very well have different views on 8 then the church (of course).

  •  There's a "piling on" going on here which I don't (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ogre, VinBacchus, rf7777, Ellinorianne

    like and indeed find highly distasteful. Scorching attacks on Mormon church rituals, boycotts of businesses like Marriott, which has earned a top-rating from the Human Rights Campaign and offered domestic partner benefits to their employees long before most other chains. We're using a bazooka when a laser would be much more effective.

  •  Marriott Is a Company of Contradictions (0+ / 0-)

    The founding family has all sorts of right-wing ties, yet their hotel rooms are one of the country's greatest distributors of adult movies.  Imagine that!

    All the same, I am not sure that Proposition 8 is one of those contradictions.

    You can call me "Lord Bink Forester de Rothschild."

    by bink on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:20:31 PM PST

  •  Write to Mariott Marketing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ExStr8, craigkg, Black Leather Rain

    You'll have more impact on Mariott with a letter to their marketing department, and their PR department, than talking to some clueless reservations agent.

    Everyone who cares about targeting Mariott should send a letter to Mariott's marketing and PR departments whenever they make a reservation at any hotel that isn't Mariott. And everyone who reserves with Mariott anyway could still write that letter, threatening to withhold business in the future (by those most important "repeat customers").

    Targeting Mariott feels good. Changing Mariott, or the Mormon church, or Prop 8 (and its successors) feels even better.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:20:45 PM PST

  •  There certainly are a lot of people (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TiaRachel, ExStr8, sternsieger, roycej

    who think that oppressed can gain their civil rights while behaving in an excruciatingly polite manner. You can't have demonstrations. You can't have boycotts.

    I well remember the fight for black civil rights. The so called "moderate" white southerners were saying the same thing. It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now.

  •  I think you're off base here (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    linkage, rf7777, Ellinorianne, BFSkinner

    I read the long letter from William Marriott, and I find the argument against him falls flat.

    I find the argument that Marriott did not work to defeat Prop 8 disingenuous. I expect companies like Marriott to stay out of such social/political issues, as they must follow the law of the land.

    Furthermore, I have had business dealings (a number of local game conventions) with five Marriott locations and find that they are among some of the most professional and diverse group of any of the Hotels I've worked with. They absolutely do believe in service first, without any reservations. (and trust me, the people that go to the game conventions I work with are anything but mainstream).

    While I agree that the LDS Church should be held accountable for their work on Prop 8, I find the idea of a boycott against Marriott misguided at best.

    PS, My nephew and his husband were rightly upset by the passage of Prop 8 especially since we had not long ago stood up for them at their 3rd Marriage Ceremony. It was suppose to have been the last one, and now we don’t know...

  •  Let's see (7+ / 0-)

    I work for a local government.

    I'm sure a few Mormons pay taxes in the county where I work.

    So I get money from Mormons to pay my salary.

    Ergo, I support Prop 8.

    Is this where this is going? Or did I miss a step?

    I probably missed a step...I tend to do that.

    Sarah Heath Palin, Will You Please Go Now?

    by wmtriallawyer on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:28:26 PM PST

  •  I'm Straight - and no More Marriot Stays for Me (5+ / 0-)

    The closest person to me on the planet, my brother, recently got married to his partner of 34 years.
    It was terrific! My wife and I were the witnesses.
    I guess you could say I gave away the bride.
    Unless and until the Mormons embrace gays and lesbians, as they did belatedly blacks, then I will stay away
    from businesses that support the Church of Latter Day Saints. I will ask any Mormon if he tithes and if he says yes then I will not do business with him or her and I will tell them why. Religions have no business interfering with civil society.

    •  Marriott is not a religious company (3+ / 0-)

      nor does a significant proportion of their profits go to the Mormon Church.  They are a huge, 13 billion dollar/year multinational corporation with over 150,000 employees that is publically owned and tradedn on the NYSE.

      They had nothing to do with Prop 8.  They are known as a gay-friendly company. This is silly.

      •  Then Marriott should buy out (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Viceroy

        the shares held by the Marriott family. They get lots of money from Marriott hotels and tithe that money to the church. It is a cash stream for the LDS. Cutting it off would end this. IS the Marriott hotel corporation is so huge and has so much money, buying out their founders shouldn't be a problem then.

        There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

        by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:04:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks, sahmprez! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Viceroy
  •  Cause its Marriott's fault? (0+ / 0-)

    If you actually read my comment and not just the title of it please put a # in your reply.

    by acsguitar on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 12:42:31 PM PST

  •  This is ludicrous. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VinBacchus, Ellinorianne, NomDeKos, fhamme

    How far will we take this witch-hunting?

    Bill Marriott didn't contribute to nor support Prop 8.

    The company is publicly-traded, and had nothing to whatsoever with Prop 8.

    These are EXACTLY the kind of hysterics that will turn off the hearts and minds we need to win to undo bullshit like Prop 8.  We should not be creating a Nixonesque Enemies List.

    I finally put in a signature!

    by Boris Godunov on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:02:33 PM PST

  •  "Love all people" is code? Wow, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VinBacchus, Ellinorianne

    just wow.

    As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

    by ticket punch on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 01:16:08 PM PST

    •  Please consider (0+ / 0-)

      That Mormon love for gays used to (and perhaps still does atleast in secret) entail connecting electroshock devices to the genitals of gays and delivering shock pulses in response to visual homoerotic stimuli. The bumper sticker "Dear God, please save me from your followers" is appropriate in this instance.

      There are 10 kind of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

      by craigkg on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 03:12:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yep (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg, troutwaxer

    The wingnuts say: "love the sinner hate the sin."

    In their minds, it exculpates them from the love dictum, because they still LOVE gays and lesbians, they just HATE the fact that they are having sex.

  •  Ticket punch (0+ / 0-)

    For someone who has been very active on this diary, you didn't rec it.  Why? Are you shilling and afraid to draw attention to the discussion by bumping it up the rec list?

    I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

    by Skylarking on Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 02:46:12 PM PST

  •  Ticket Punch recommended a Fox Boycott himself (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site