Hobby Lobby, not just exemption from birth control mandate

[longtimelurker]

Hobby Lobby's attitude may be further gauged by Mart Green's (one of the heirs to the company) financial support of an anti-Israeli and possibly anti-Jewish film.  The company that made the film is located in Hobby Lobby's Oklahoma office complex:

http://www.fighthatred.com/profiles-in-hate/religious-figures/941-mart-green-millionaire-american-christian-who-supports-the-accusation-that-israel-is-racist

Note that the very conservative Christian news-gathering organization World News Daily broke the story.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

But I am still disgusted by the people who say it is okay for large corporations to ban the sale of holiday items for other religions.  Once your business grows to a certain size and operates in certain neighborhoods it's time to get your head out of your @$$.

Let me get this straight.If I own a chain of 500 plus stores and I have maybe 5 stores where stocking some merchandise that appeals to a small demographic would make business sense, I'm obligated to carry goods for that demographic?  Even if you argue that I only need to do so in those 5 stores, that's still imposing back office costs for handling the extra items.  Besides, if I truly am passing up a chance to make a buck out of menorahs and dreidles, isn't that already a punishment?

Plus even if I do choose to not carry the items, how does that constitute a ban?  There are plenty of other stores in that market segment.

[Link]

But I am still disgusted by the people who say it is okay for large corporations to ban the sale of holiday items for other religions.  Once your business grows to a certain size and operates in certain neighborhoods it's time to get your head out of your @$$.

Let me get this straight.If I own a chain of 500 plus stores and I have maybe 5 stores where stocking some merchandise that appeals to a small demographic would make business sense, I'm obligated to carry goods for that demographic?

Not if it doesn't make financial sense.  Plenty of multibillion dollar multinationals do not cater to every single religion in the United States.  And they don't have any problems.  If there simply is not enough demand nobody would expect you stock it.  But if you say I am making a conscious nonfinancial decision not to stock those products that is wrong and stupid.  And it is perfectly okay for us to comment on that.  I am not saying there should be a law.  I am just expressing my opinion.

Plus even if I do choose to not carry the items, how does that constitute a ban?  There are plenty of other stores in that market segment.

If you refuse to carry it it is banned from your store.  That's the definition of a ban.

No one has a problem with the items not being stocked.  It's the underlying reason for the items not being stocked.  And frankly I believe the reason the items weren't stocked was financial, which isn't a problem.  The company seems to have had a perfectly legitimate reason not to carry the items.  The issue is what is going on with their corporate culture that makes so many of their front line staff throw out unnecessary bigoted statements.  If I was working there I would say we simply didn't have enough demand but if you are interested in those items I will pass your request up the chain of command.  Or the people at the store could have simply said I don't know.  I am far more educated, far more critical to my organizations basic functions, and get paid a lot more than a manager at Hobby Lobby.  I routinely say "I don't know" when asked questions because I don't set the rules and policies and I know when a man off the street, lawyer, or reporter gets one slightly wrong piece of information it makes front page news in a very skewed article.  So I choose not to feed that monster.  But for some reason multiple people felt emboldened to say something awful to a customer.  That's an issue.

[Link]

Well actually TJ provided a calm, thought out response about the corporate quote. But you know, keep on knocking over straw men and arguing in caps if that floats your boat.

Again, I'll repeat TJ's question:

How is the owner a narrow-minded bigot or anti-semite for not selling Jewish goods? Is one not allowed to have theological views at all without being a bigot these days?

Still trying to figure out what this has to do with "theology"...



Not sure how commercializing Hanukkah is going to make you go to hell any faster.  Two things Jesus did 1) celebrate Jewish holidays on a regular basis 2) Drive the money changers out of the temple.

I don't know why in 2013 people want to defend naked bigotry.

[jimrtex]

Did EVERYONE miss the quote from CORPORATE office spokesperson advising the reasons for not selling Jewish items was that "[the owner] is Christian and those are his values"? Does anyone REALLY need a map drawn between that statement of the OWNER'S values, the statement from the local employee, and the owner's firm intrusion of fundamentalist views into his company's governance?!?? It's clearly ideology that's blinding people as to the reality of the situation, not creating the problem.

Here is the original blog entry.

WHY I WILL NEVER EVER PATRONIZE HOBBY LOBBY

Mr. Berwitz claims he called THE MARLBORO STORE and was told, "Because Mr. Green is the owner of the company, he's a Christian, and those are his values."  It was YOUR INFERENCE based on your prejudices that because a radio station interviewed him and he said he heard it "with his own ears" that it was a discussion with the "corporate" office.

The "we don't cater to you people" was a 2nd hand (or possibly 3rd hand) from a friend of Berwitz's wife, and was actually in reference to the lack of Bar Mitzvah cards.  Who knows how that conversation actually went?   Did she say something along the lines of "I see you cater to Gentiles", in a disapproving voice?  People in New Jersey are not noted for their civility.

Some follow ups.

HOBBY LOBBY: ANSWERING THE COMMENTERS

MY CONVERSATION WITH STEVE GREEN

The last was after the son of the owner had called and explained that Hobby Lobby carries the same 70,000 items in all their stores, but was looking into the possibility of customizing their offerings more.

They may or may not.  You have more leverage when offering to buy something that will be sold in 500 stores vs. in 5 stores, and it may be a distraction for buyers.

[jimrtex]

Hobby Lobby's attitude may be further gauged by Mart Green's (one of the heirs to the company) financial support of an anti-Israeli and possibly anti-Jewish film.  The company that made the film is located in Hobby Lobby's Oklahoma office complex:

http://www.fighthatred.com/profiles-in-hate/religious-figures/941-mart-green-millionaire-american-christian-who-supports-the-accusation-that-israel-is-racist

Note that the very conservative Christian news-gathering organization World News Daily broke the story.

From your URL.

"Most American evangelical Christians are known to be strongly supportive of Israel’s right to all of its land, including Judea and Samaria ... This is not the position of Mart Green."

Is Barack Obama known to be strongly supportive of Israel's right to all of its land, including Judea and Samaria?  Is Obama possibly anti-Semitic?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Plus even if I do choose to not carry the items, how does that constitute a ban?  There are plenty of other stores in that market segment.

If you refuse to carry it it is banned from your store.  That's the definition of a ban.

Nope.  If you forbid others from carrying it in their stores, that's a ban.  If you forbid it in your own stores, that's personal choice.  Now if Hobby Lobby used the franchise model in its operations and it forbade its franchisees carrying such goods, that would be a ban, but that's not how Hobby Lobby is structured.

[Link]

Plus even if I do choose to not carry the items, how does that constitute a ban?  There are plenty of other stores in that market segment.

If you refuse to carry it it is banned from your store.  That's the definition of a ban.

Nope.  If you forbid others from carrying it in their stores, that's a ban.  If you forbid it in your own stores, that's personal choice.

You can make a personal choice to ban something.  What dictionary are you using that says those two things are mutually exclusive?  I can make a personal choice to say no dreidels in my house.  Well guess what I just banned dreidels from my house.  What is unclear about that?  And more importantly in the face of such bigotry why are you quibbling about semantics?

Now if Hobby Lobby used the franchise model in its operations and it forbade its franchisees carrying such goods, that would be a ban, but that's not how Hobby Lobby is structured.

Federalist for reasons only you know you are creating new vocabulary and or laws.  I have never in my life heard anyone concoct such a distinction.  And of course plenty of companies that franchise their business dictate what can and cannot be sold in the franchises.  There is nothing illegal or morally wrong about that.

Look if you make a company that grows to a certain size and is invited into a diversity of communities you need to be sensitive to that.  As President Obama wisely said you didn't build that.  Hobby Lobby disproportionately uses our ports, highways, law enforcement, fire services, national grid, etc.  There is nothing in any Christian text that forbids a driedel from sitting next to a frosty the snowman trinket on a shelf.  If driedels were around when Jesus was a kid I'm sure he played with them.  Heck he was a carpenter.  I'm sure he made a few.

[Brittain33]

There is no evidence that the store employee in New Jersey was a manager.  If someone asked about Hannakuh stuff, and was told that they didn't have any, and then got in the employee's face about why not, etc.  They might be dismissed with we don't cater to you people.  Maybe the shopper was complaining about the stores being closed on Sunday, but open on Saturday.  What most people might consider to be rude, probably is not considered rude in New Jersey or New York.

Jim, that's certainly one possibility - that the customer was especially pushy and rude and forced the situation. Another possibility is that the store employee is rather high on the autism spectrum, with fixed views of what is right and wrong and firmly anchored in their own rules, and reacted to a disagreement or innocent question with uncalled-for hostility or a patronizing response. We'll never know, certainly.

And now, I am locking this thread, because there is nothing good to come of it.