Guinness won't be a sponsor of this year's NYC St. Patrick's Day Parade

Guinness is the latest beer giant to withdraw its support for a St. Patrick's Day parade because lesbian and gay groups aren't allowed to march openly.

The beer maker late Sunday announced its decision to drop its sponsorship of Monday's parade in New York City.

Over the weekend, gay rights icon Stonewall Inn had threatened to stop selling Guinness beer if the company continued to sponsor the parade. And LGBT advocacy group GLAAD had planned an anti-Guinness event on Monday.

"We were hopeful that the policy of exclusion would be reversed for this year's parade," Guinness said in a statement. "As this has not come to pass, Guinness has withdrawn its participation."

Parade organizers could not be reached for comment.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/16/pf/guinness-parade/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Nice, bigots have chased the most famous Irish beer away from the world's biggest St. Patrick's Day parade ...

I thought St Patrick's day was an Irish thing. Why would gay groups want to march?

Who is being the bigots?

sphinx wrote:Who is being the bigots?

The organisers presumably - The Ancient Order of the Hibernians. I had to google them.   

This is just ridiculous - who exactly is being prejudiced against who here? The Irish against Gays? New York against Gays? Gays against the Irish?

I'm confused - why can't gay and lesbian types join in the parade?

BigAndy9 wrote:I'm confused - why can't gay and lesbian types join in the parade?

They can, just not as gay people.

Raggamuffin wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:I'm confused - why can't gay and lesbian types join in the parade?

They can, just not as gay people.

Why?

Have I missed something?

Where is the story?

BigAndy9 wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They can, just not as gay people.

Why?

Have I missed something?

Where is the story?

Here are some further links.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10701963/St-Patricks-Day-Guinness-drops-parade-sponsorship-over-gay-rights.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/17/guinness-pulls-out-new-yorks-st-patricks-day-parade

The organisers are Catholic, so they don't want openly gay groups parading apparently. They can march as long as they don't have gay-friendly banners or whatever.

I'm not sure if gay groups have always been banned from openly marching though.

As far as I can work out the gay and lesbian groups (why are they seen as different incidentally) want to join the march with clear identification of their sexuality. The organizers have said no to the identification - the groups are welcome to march and parade but simply as people celebrating St Patricks day. The gay and Lesbian groups have responded to this by informing sponsors of the event such as Heineken and Guiness that they will be cancelling any group orders with them and boycotting independents serving their product unless the sponsors withdraw - and the sponsors have indeed withdrawn.

I think the story is that gay and lesbian groups are now forcing things that have nothing to do with sexuality to become about sexuality by bullying suppliers and sponsors.

Is the parade about Ireland or promoting other various militant organisations?

I'm sure the gays and lesbians will be happy to compromise and not carry their banners, instead just joining in the celebration of Ireland.

I joined in one yesterday - it was wonderful - celebrating Irish dancing, the farming industry and the different counties of Oireland. There were probably a couple of gays there too. I wouldn't know though, would I?

Raggamuffin wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Why?

Have I missed something?

Where is the story?

Here are some further links.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10701963/St-Patricks-Day-Guinness-drops-parade-sponsorship-over-gay-rights.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/17/guinness-pulls-out-new-yorks-st-patricks-day-parade

The organisers are Catholic, so they don't want openly gay groups parading apparently. They can march as long as they don't have gay-friendly banners or whatever.

I'm not sure if gay groups have always been banned from openly marching though.

I think that is over complicating the matter - what the hell has St Patricks day got to do with sexuality in the first place? Why do the gay groups need to identify themselves as gay for this event?

sphinx wrote:As far as I can work out the gay and lesbian groups (why are they seen as different incidentally) want to join the march with clear identification of their sexuality.  The organizers have said no to the identification - the groups are welcome to march and parade but simply as people celebrating St Patricks day.  The gay and Lesbian groups have responded to this by informing sponsors of the event such as Heineken and Guiness that they will be cancelling any group orders with them and boycotting independents serving their product unless the sponsors withdraw - and the sponsors have indeed withdrawn.

I think the story is that gay and lesbian groups are now forcing things that have nothing to do with sexuality to become about sexuality by bullying suppliers and sponsors.

Yes, although the sponsors could have ignored them of course.

sphinx wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Here are some further links.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10701963/St-Patricks-Day-Guinness-drops-parade-sponsorship-over-gay-rights.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/17/guinness-pulls-out-new-yorks-st-patricks-day-parade

The organisers are Catholic, so they don't want openly gay groups parading apparently. They can march as long as they don't have gay-friendly banners or whatever.

I'm not sure if gay groups have always been banned from openly marching though.

I think that is over complicating the matter - what the hell has St Patricks day got to do with sexuality in the first place?  Why do the gay groups need to identify themselves as gay for this event?

I don't know, and I don't know why non-Irish people want to celebrate St Patrick's day either. I ignore it because I'm not Irish.

sphinx wrote:As far as I can work out the gay and lesbian groups (why are they seen as different incidentally) want to join the march with clear identification of their sexuality.  The organizers have said no to the identification - the groups are welcome to march and parade but simply as people celebrating St Patricks day.  The gay and Lesbian groups have responded to this by informing sponsors of the event such as Heineken and Guiness that they will be cancelling any group orders with them and boycotting independents serving their product unless the sponsors withdraw - and the sponsors have indeed withdrawn.

I think the story is that gay and lesbian groups are now forcing things that have nothing to do with sexuality to become about sexuality by bullying suppliers and sponsors.

Sure, as opposed to the rest of society forcing them to act like they're not gay, to keep it to themselves as though they have something to hide, because it might make some uncomfortable.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:As far as I can work out the gay and lesbian groups (why are they seen as different incidentally) want to join the march with clear identification of their sexuality.  The organizers have said no to the identification - the groups are welcome to march and parade but simply as people celebrating St Patricks day.  The gay and Lesbian groups have responded to this by informing sponsors of the event such as Heineken and Guiness that they will be cancelling any group orders with them and boycotting independents serving their product unless the sponsors withdraw - and the sponsors have indeed withdrawn.

I think the story is that gay and lesbian groups are now forcing things that have nothing to do with sexuality to become about sexuality by bullying suppliers and sponsors.

Sure, as opposed to the rest of society forcing them to act like they're not gay, to keep it to themselves as though they have something to hide, because it might make some uncomfortable.

What do you mean by "act like they're not gay"? Why do they have to go on a parade to tell everyone they're gay? I don't get it.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:As far as I can work out the gay and lesbian groups (why are they seen as different incidentally) want to join the march with clear identification of their sexuality.  The organizers have said no to the identification - the groups are welcome to march and parade but simply as people celebrating St Patricks day.  The gay and Lesbian groups have responded to this by informing sponsors of the event such as Heineken and Guiness that they will be cancelling any group orders with them and boycotting independents serving their product unless the sponsors withdraw - and the sponsors have indeed withdrawn.

I think the story is that gay and lesbian groups are now forcing things that have nothing to do with sexuality to become about sexuality by bullying suppliers and sponsors.

Sure, as opposed to the rest of society forcing them to act like they're not gay, to keep it to themselves as though they have something to hide, because it might make some uncomfortable.

Act like they are not gay?

Is society asking them not to have sex with each other or not walk down the street with one another?

Or by that are you insinuating gays act differently? Maybe look differently eh Ben?

It's just this Stonewall Inn where Guinness would be banned then? Are they not then being bigoted against a company who has supported Catholics?

I'm not saying Guinness are being bullied - it's up to them who they sponsor or not, and it's also up to the Stonewall Inn which beers they have, but it's a bit daft.

I doubt that the gay organisations care that much, they just don't like being told that they can't have gay banners.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Sure, as opposed to the rest of society forcing them to act like they're not gay, to keep it to themselves as though they have something to hide, because it might make some uncomfortable.

Act like they are not gay?

Is society asking them not to have sex with each other or not walk down the street with one another?

Or by that are you insinuating gays act differently?  Maybe look differently eh Ben?

If I met a gay friend for coffee and didn't talk about them being gay, am I acting as if they're not gay? I don't think that being gay should define a person.

Does this shed any more light on it? This is about Boston, but it's the same sort of thing.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/2014/03/04/patrick-parade-organizers-again-reject-application-from-massequality-march-procession/tgruhUOc6ukySz8jYJTc1N/story.html?s_campaign=sm_tw

Raggamuffin wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


Act like they are not gay?

Is society asking them not to have sex with each other or not walk down the street with one another?

Or by that are you insinuating gays act differently?  Maybe look differently eh Ben?

If I met a gay friend for coffee and didn't talk about them being gay, am I acting as if they're not gay? I don't think that being gay should define a person.

I really do not understand some peoples' views of gay people.

The only thing that defines a gay person is their attraction to people of their own sex and for others to treat them like special objects is just bizarre.

Surely equality is about people not giving a toss whether they are or are not something?

What is "acting gay" anyway? Is it something just gay people do? Or can straight people do it to?

I mean isnt St Patricks day about being Irish and celebrating that? Isnt the encouragement for non Irish to join in and "act Irish"?

How about this to think about - the gay and lesbian community have their own parades - what about if on one of those parades a group came along wanting to dress green and carry signs saying "We're Irish"?

I mean I could see the problem if Gays were not allowed to take part. I could see the problem if gays were not allowed to have their own parades. I cannot see why it is a problem to say this parade is about something nothing to do with sexuality so all participants being equal should be celebrating what the parade is about not pointing out that they are members of a different minority.

Quite a few of the news outlet's are reporting this as "gay ban etc"

Laughable.

Still waiting for Ben to tell us about this:

"Sure, as opposed to the rest of society forcing them to act like they're not gay,"

sphinx wrote:Surely equality is about people not giving a toss whether they are or are not something?

What is "acting gay" anyway?  Is it something just gay people do?  Or can straight people do it to?

I mean isnt St Patricks day about being Irish and celebrating that?  Isnt the encouragement for non Irish to join in and "act Irish"?

How about this to think about - the gay and lesbian community have their own parades - what about if on one of those parades a group came along wanting to dress green and carry signs saying "We're Irish"?

I mean I could see the problem if Gays were not allowed to take part.  I could see the problem if gays were not allowed to have their own parades.  I cannot see why it is a problem to say this parade is about something nothing to do with sexuality so all participants being equal should be celebrating what the parade is about  not pointing out that they are members of a different minority.

What about if some want to wear clothes that state they are both Irish and homosexual and proud?
I fail to see why there is even a ban on sexual orientation being displayed is more the point here in the first place, why does there need to be such a ban?

Didge wrote:

sphinx wrote:Surely equality is about people not giving a toss whether they are or are not something?

What is "acting gay" anyway?  Is it something just gay people do?  Or can straight people do it to?

I mean isnt St Patricks day about being Irish and celebrating that?  Isnt the encouragement for non Irish to join in and "act Irish"?

How about this to think about - the gay and lesbian community have their own parades - what about if on one of those parades a group came along wanting to dress green and carry signs saying "We're Irish"?

I mean I could see the problem if Gays were not allowed to take part.  I could see the problem if gays were not allowed to have their own parades.  I cannot see why it is a problem to say this parade is about something nothing to do with sexuality so all participants being equal should be celebrating what the parade is about  not pointing out that they are members of a different minority.

What about if some want to wear clothes that state they are both Irish and homosexual and proud?
I fail to see why there is even a ban on sexual orientation being displayed is more the point here in the first place, why does there need to be such a ban?

There is no ban on clothing, as far as I'm aware.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Didge wrote:


What about if some want to wear clothes that state they are both Irish and homosexual and proud?
I fail to see why there is even a ban on sexual orientation being displayed is more the point here in the first place, why does there need to be such a ban?

There is no ban on clothing, as far as I'm aware.

There is if you read the link Andy:


Both parades have policies under which sexual orientation is not allowed to be displayed, meaning marchers are not able to hold signs or wear shirts identifying themselves as LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender).

Didge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


There is no ban on clothing, as far as I'm aware.

There is if you read the link Andy:


Both parades have policies under which sexual orientation is not allowed to be displayed, meaning marchers are not able to hold signs or wear shirts identifying themselves as LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender).

Ah, right.

I think we need to see the policies, don't we.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:As far as I can work out the gay and lesbian groups (why are they seen as different incidentally) want to join the march with clear identification of their sexuality.  The organizers have said no to the identification - the groups are welcome to march and parade but simply as people celebrating St Patricks day.  The gay and Lesbian groups have responded to this by informing sponsors of the event such as Heineken and Guiness that they will be cancelling any group orders with them and boycotting independents serving their product unless the sponsors withdraw - and the sponsors have indeed withdrawn.

I think the story is that gay and lesbian groups are now forcing things that have nothing to do with sexuality to become about sexuality by bullying suppliers and sponsors.

Sure, as opposed to the rest of society forcing them to act like they're not gay, to keep it to themselves as though they have something to hide, because it might make some uncomfortable.

What do you mean by "act like they're not gay"? Why do they have to go on a parade to tell everyone they're gay? I don't get it.

It's still an act of courage and pride in oneself to be openly gay and not closeted in the U.S. -- why do people have such a problem with them living their lives as they see fit? Why do people want to dictate to them that they keep it to themselves?

Can I just clarify something?

Are these gays wanting to be "in the parade"?

As far as I'm aware, in most of these events, there are people who participate in the parade, and those who cheer the parade on from the sidelines.

Usually, those who participate in the parade are a part of the organisation - active participants of a club, or organisation who would usually understand the rules and comply with them.

So, I'm guessing that a group wants to butt in and cause a whole heap of trouble here - a group who knew full well what they were up to.

BigAndy9 wrote:Can I just clarify something?

Are these gays wanting to be "in the parade"?

As far as I'm aware, in most of these events, there are people who participate in the parade, and those who cheer the parade on from the sidelines.

Usually, those who participate in the parade are a part of the organisation - active participants of a club, or organisation who would usually understand the rules and comply with them.

So, I'm guessing that a group wants to butt in and cause a whole heap of trouble here - a group who knew full well what they were up to.

No, they want to parade down the street openly identifying as homosexual, that's it. Apparently some people have a big problem with that.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:Can I just clarify something?

Are these gays wanting to be "in the parade"?

As far as I'm aware, in most of these events, there are people who participate in the parade, and those who cheer the parade on from the sidelines.

Usually, those who participate in the parade are a part of the organisation - active participants of a club, or organisation who would usually understand the rules and comply with them.

So, I'm guessing that a group wants to butt in and cause a whole heap of trouble here - a group who knew full well what they were up to.

No, they want to parade down the street openly identifying as homosexual, that's it. Apparently some people have a big problem with that.

Nobody has a problem with it.

Those who have a problem are the gays - they have a problem with a peaceful organisation doing absolutely no harm to anybody else wanting to live by their own rules.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

No, they want to parade down the street openly identifying as homosexual, that's it. Apparently some people have a big problem with that.

Nobody has a problem with it.

Those who have a problem are the gays - they have a problem with a peaceful organisation doing absolutely no harm to anybody else wanting to live by their own rules.

Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

Didge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

No, they want to parade down the street openly identifying as homosexual, that's it. Apparently some people have a big problem with that.

Nobody has a problem with it.

Those who have a problem are the gays - they have a problem with a peaceful organisation doing absolutely no harm to anybody else wanting to live by their own rules.

Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

St. Patrick's Day is a pretty big holiday across the U.S., not just for the Irish, and especially in NYC, where former mayor Ed Koch (who's Jewish) proclaimed himself "Ed O'Koch" on St. Patrick's Day. I just wonder if the organizers can be that inclusive why they can't include gay people; very bigoted.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:



Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

St. Patrick's Day is a pretty big holiday across the U.S., not just for the Irish, and especially in NYC, where former mayor Ed Koch (who's Jewish) proclaimed himself "Ed O'Koch" on St. Patrick's Day. I just wonder if the organizers can be that inclusive why they can't include gay people; very bigoted.

Agreed Ben, I see no reason why they should have such a policy for a fun day out for all.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:



Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

St. Patrick's Day is a pretty big holiday across the U.S., not just for the Irish, and especially in NYC, where former mayor Ed Koch (who's Jewish) proclaimed himself "Ed O'Koch" on St. Patrick's Day. I just wonder if the organizers can be that inclusive why they can't include gay people; very bigoted.

"Include me. Include me!"

"Even though we have nothing in common. Just include me, please."


  

BigAndy9 wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:



Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

St. Patrick's Day is a pretty big holiday across the U.S., not just for the Irish, and especially in NYC, where former mayor Ed Koch (who's Jewish) proclaimed himself "Ed O'Koch" on St. Patrick's Day. I just wonder if the organizers can be that inclusive why they can't include gay people; very bigoted.

"Include me.  Include me!"

"Even though we have nothing in common.  Just include me, please."  


  

NOTHING in common? How about most things in common?

Just because you'd prefer to pretend gay people don't exist doesn't mean gay people should have to play along, BigAhmadinejad9.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:Can I just clarify something?

Are these gays wanting to be "in the parade"?

As far as I'm aware, in most of these events, there are people who participate in the parade, and those who cheer the parade on from the sidelines.

Usually, those who participate in the parade are a part of the organisation - active participants of a club, or organisation who would usually understand the rules and comply with them.

So, I'm guessing that a group wants to butt in and cause a whole heap of trouble here - a group who knew full well what they were up to.

No, they want to parade down the street openly identifying as homosexual, that's it. Apparently some people have a big problem with that.

Why do they want to do that though?

There was a chess tournament on in the local civic hall on Saturday.

I went along and asked if I could participate.

They told me I don't play chess. I shouted "but we're all human and from London aren't we?"

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What do you mean by "act like they're not gay"? Why do they have to go on a parade to tell everyone they're gay? I don't get it.

It's still an act of courage and pride in oneself to be openly gay and not closeted in the U.S. -- why do people have such a problem with them living their lives as they see fit? Why do people want to dictate to them that they keep it to themselves?

People who think something needs courage for a thing are the ones who think there is something wrong with that thing

Didge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


Nobody has a problem with it.

Those who have a problem are the gays - they have a problem with a peaceful organisation doing absolutely no harm to anybody else wanting to live by their own rules.

Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

Again what is openly gay? Is someone only really really gay if they walk everywhere in a T-shirt proclaiming the fact?

What about the people who happily date and live together, go to work, take part in life but feel no need to be "openly" gay?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:



Incorrect, the parade has a problem with it being as it has not allowed people to be openly gay.
So why should they not be allowed to state who they are and if Irish also?

St. Patrick's Day is a pretty big holiday across the U.S., not just for the Irish, and especially in NYC, where former mayor Ed Koch (who's Jewish) proclaimed himself "Ed O'Koch" on St. Patrick's Day. I just wonder if the organizers can be that inclusive why they can't include gay people; very bigoted.

Include or let take over?

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

It's still an act of courage and pride in oneself to be openly gay and not closeted in the U.S. -- why do people have such a problem with them living their lives as they see fit? Why do people want to dictate to them that they keep it to themselves?

People who think something needs courage for a thing are the ones who think there is something wrong with that thing

I completely agree.

Some on here are getting mixed up with people saying "so what, it just isn't an issue" - that doesn't mean I/we hate gays, it means I/we have accepted them as one of us, not as a gay person.

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What do you mean by "act like they're not gay"? Why do they have to go on a parade to tell everyone they're gay? I don't get it.

It's still an act of courage and pride in oneself to be openly gay and not closeted in the U.S. -- why do people have such a problem with them living their lives as they see fit? Why do people want to dictate to them that they keep it to themselves?

People who think something needs courage for a thing are the ones who think there is something wrong with that thing

Um, bullshit. Everyone knows how certain segments of society react to people being unapologetically gay; it definitely takes courage to stand up to people like the U.S. preacher who believes gays should be stoned to death in the streets.

BigAhmidinejad9, this is about walking or rolling along, not playing chess or having any other special skill. What a dumb analogy.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:

People who think something needs courage for a thing are the ones who think there is something wrong with that thing

Um, bullshit. Everyone knows how certain segments of society react to people being unapologetically gay; it definitely takes courage to stand up to people like the U.S. preacher who believes gays should be stoned to death in the streets.

BigAhmidinejad9, this is about walking or rolling along, not playing chess or having any other special skill. What a dumb analogy.

Tell me how would the preacher know if someone was gay?

::stpat::     

THIS whole silly shamozzle has made me feel "a bit green around the gills", to be sure to be sure !!!

SOMEBODY pass me a "Black and Tan", if you please barman..

AND go easy on that green food dye !

 ::smthg::

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:

People who think something needs courage for a thing are the ones who think there is something wrong with that thing

Um, bullshit. Everyone knows how certain segments of society react to people being unapologetically gay; it definitely takes courage to stand up to people like the U.S. preacher who believes gays should be stoned to death in the streets.

BigAhmidinejad9, this is about walking or rolling along, not playing chess or having any other special skill. What a dumb analogy.

Tell me how would the preacher know if someone was gay?

Maybe he'd see them out on a date with a member of the same sex, just living their lives?

Lone Wolf wrote:::stpat::     

THIS whole silly shamozzle has made me feel "a bit green around the gills", to be sure to be sure !!!

SOMEBODY pass me a "Black and Tan", if you please barman..

AND go easy on that green food dye !

 ::smthg::

And hold the Tan!

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:

People who think something needs courage for a thing are the ones who think there is something wrong with that thing

Um, bullshit. Everyone knows how certain segments of society react to people being unapologetically gay; it definitely takes courage to stand up to people like the U.S. preacher who believes gays should be stoned to death in the streets.

BigAhmidinejad9, this is about walking or rolling along, not playing chess or having any other special skill. What a dumb analogy.

They've stopped them from walking now?

God damn those American homophobes!

B4st4rds!

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Tell me how would the preacher know if someone was gay?

Maybe he'd see them out on a date with a member of the same sex, just living their lives?

Is the parade opposed to that?