I wonder what Sam Adams would say about this?
One thing would be certain, he'd sue to have his name removed.

Two of the country's biggest beer companies are withdrawing their sponsorships of upcoming St. Patrick's Day parades because gay and lesbian groups aren't allowed to march openly.

Sam Adams, owned by Boston Beer Co (SAM), will no longer be sponsoring the parade in Boston on Sunday, while Heineken (HEINY) has pulled its sponsorship from the New York City parade on Monday.

"We believe in equality for all," a Heineken USA spokeswoman said.

Sam Adams said it had tried to convince Boston's parade organizers to modify their rules and allow LGBT groups to march.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/14/pf/heineken-sam-adams-parades/

What idiots.

Quote from: taxed on March 15, 2014, 05:52:39 PM
What idiots.

That about sums it up.

Quote from: Solar on March 15, 2014, 05:22:11 PM
I wonder what Sam Adams would say about this?
One thing would be certain, he'd sue to have his name removed.

Two of the country's biggest beer companies are withdrawing their sponsorships of upcoming St. Patrick's Day parades because gay and lesbian groups aren't allowed to march openly.

Sam Adams, owned by Boston Beer Co (SAM), will no longer be sponsoring the parade in Boston on Sunday, while Heineken (HEINY) has pulled its sponsorship from the New York City parade on Monday.

"We believe in equality for all," a Heineken USA spokeswoman said.

Sam Adams said it had tried to convince Boston's parade organizers to modify their rules and allow LGBT groups to march.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/14/pf/heineken-sam-adams-parades/

Hmm... When my boy comes over the hill for the weekend I always get him a half rack of Heineken.  So now I will look for something new for him.   Sam Adams is out also!

Quote from: walkstall on March 15, 2014, 06:59:00 PM
Hmm... When my boy comes over the hill for the weekend I always get him a half rack of Heineken.  So now I will look for something new for him.   Sam Adams is out also!

Give Lowenbrau a shot, assuming they haven't gone down the fag road as well.

Quote from: walkstall on March 15, 2014, 06:59:00 PM
Hmm... When my boy comes over the hill for the weekend I always get him a half rack of Heineken.  So now I will look for something new for him.   Sam Adams is out also!

Arrogant Bastard. Not an insult to you, it's good heavy beer. I also recommend Killian's Irish Red and if I'm feeling kinky, any nice bock will do.

First off Heineken and Sam Adams have the right to sponsor or not sponsor whomever they want. Why would any Conservative support forced association? Secondly what the hell is an openly gay person? Why does a gay person have to let everyone know he or she is gay? It's not that they aren't allowed to march. They just can't fly banners that promote their sexuality. Thirdly Sam Adams and Heineken hopefully take the same position with any and all Islamic organizations.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 15, 2014, 08:09:26 PM
First off Heineken and Sam Adams have the right to sponsor or not sponsor whomever they want. Why would any Conservative support forced association? Secondly what the hell is an openly gay person? Why does a gay person have to let everyone know he or she is gay? It's not that they aren't allowed to march. They just can't fly banners that promote their sexuality. Thirdly Sam Adams and Heineken hopefully take the same position with any and all Islamic organizations.

Who said anything about forced association? They have the right to sponsor who they would like and we have the right to choose to drink a different beer. What's your problem with that?

Quote from: Dr. Meh on March 15, 2014, 08:52:44 PM
Who said anything about forced association? They have the right to sponsor who they would like and we have the right to choose to drink a different beer. What's your problem with that?

This thread is about boycotting two companies because they choose to not sponsor a parade that excludes openly gay people.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 15, 2014, 09:18:54 PM
This thread is about boycotting two companies because they choose to not sponsor a parade that excludes openly gay people.

Yes, I know. That doesn't answer my question. Businesses by nature are and should be amoral. Not moral, not immoral. If a business wants to make the leap to define its morality, those opposed can and do have the right to take their business elsewhere if they do not agree on said morals. So again: what's the problem? Or are you suggesting that as conservatives we should have forced association with businesses that we morally disagree with?

Quote from: Dr. Meh on March 15, 2014, 09:38:16 PM
Yes, I know. That doesn't answer my question. Businesses by nature are and should be amoral. Not moral, not immoral. If a business wants to make the leap to define its morality, those opposed can and do have the right to take their business elsewhere if they do not agree on said morals. So again: what's the problem? Or are you suggesting that as conservatives we should have forced association with businesses that we morally disagree with?

We shouldn't be advocating a boycott. By boycotting you are punishing one entity for not associating with another.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 15, 2014, 09:41:09 PM
We shouldn't be advocating a boycott. By boycotting you are punishing one entity for not associating with another.

Sort of how they did when boycotting the parade? And I'm assuming the entity we are boycotting is the beer company but you see this as punishment for not associating with....who exactly? And you seem to be glancing over the beer company's political motive in pulling the sponsorship. Once they make it political, why should conservatives not play politics right back? I really don't understand what you see wrong about this.

Quote from: Dr. Meh on March 15, 2014, 11:29:06 PM
Sort of how they did when boycotting the parade? And I'm assuming the entity we are boycotting is the beer company but you see this as punishment for not associating with....who exactly? And you seem to be glancing over the beer company's political motive in pulling the sponsorship. Once they make it political, why should conservatives not play politics right back? I really don't understand what you see wrong about this.

You seem to not understand that a boycott is a punishment. So who is being punished and why? As it stands now we are supposed to punish Sam Adams and Heineken because they decided to pull out of the parade because the parade doesn't want gay people making a statement. At every step this is about association and each party should have the right to associate with whom they want. I can't make it any clearer....

I don't drink American beer... but when I do, I prefer Grain Belt.

I don't attend parades...  but when I do, I prefer the temps to be around 75f (25c).

I don't care about hetero or gay... but when I do, I prefer to continue not caring.

My issue is with a beer company taking a political//moral stand in an attempt to influence a private matter, a family matter for at that.
Parades primarily are for families, parents bringing their children to see and celebrate history.

So if these beer companies want to stuff an agenda down my throat via boycott, then I too will exercise my right to boycott them.