Sorry!:
Thanks for the great ideas, change.org! If you don't mind the shoutout to UUSC, we've got a lot of great socially conscious gifts for the season, activists might be interested in. One I'm particularly proud of is our Hope in Crops honeybee ornament. Youth in Kenya have carved a honeybee out of soapstone that you can buy for a fair trade price and give to your gift recipient. The rest of the funds from your purchase go to our partner SoilFarm Multi-Culture group, who are planting trees to conserve and protect the Kakamega rainforest region. Learn more about the project and get an ornament at www.uusc.org/category/product_category/new.
The good part of all of this is being on the front lines of engaging corporations to see that Citizens v. United is a landmine for them and they should not be funding elections with corporate money. That is (or should be) the real basis of our argument. So it troubles me that the HRC is doing the exact same thing (funding candidates with corporate funds) but for LGBT candidates.
Obviously, I am in full support of gay rights, but its very problematic and disheartening to criticize Target for doing something and then stoop to their level and do it "for our side." Wasn't their action of mixing corporate funds and elections wrong to begin with?
The end goal should be to have corporations to agree to not donate to ANY political candidates, period. Because if Target donates to an LGBT candidate today, that's not success in the long run. That's only victory for today. There will be other candidates, other states, other corporations, other money. Some will benefit us and support LGBT friendly candidates, some will not. So the true measure of success is not to balance the scales of funding in this particular instance, but to get companies to agree to keep corporate funds out of elections ENTIRELY. I hope HRC will see the forest for the trees.
|
9 Actions
|
2 Actions
|
|
1 Action
|
|