Bob Chapek's response to Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

[ImperfectPixie]

Again, strawman arguments don't work with me or any others that don't agree with you. I'm certainly not afraid of gay people. In fact, all people are God's creation and we should treat them with dignity and respect. Where I draw the line is where I'm supposed to celebrate Gay-ness (sorry if that's not the correct word). You may believe there is a genetic cause to same-sex attraction. I don't and neither do other scientists.

On a perfect board, no one would state, "hey, I'm gay" or "hey, I'm straight". I just don't care what your orientation is. If I can't treat you like a lady or gentleman, I shouldn't be on here.

It's not a strawman argument - the person who wrote the bill openly admitted that he thinks gayness is a spreadable condition and that's the reason he wrote it...because he's afraid it's spreading.

Also, please don't misrepresent science. The article itself states that there is no SINGLE genetic cause of a person being gay...that's completely different from saying that genes aren't the cause. It could be a particular combination of genes.

If you are averse to celebrating gay people...are you averse to celebrating Irish people? Or people of color? Or women?

 

[flynnibus]

Well as a fan, shareholder, and former CM, this is concerning to me that Disney is actively relocating a workforce to Florida, with an ultimatum of move to a new state or lose your job.

That group of people being moved to Florida includes some incredibly talented humans who happen to be LGBT+, and they are now being forced to move to a State that is actively unfriendly towards them, from a State that is far more inclusive.

So add this to the list of things people don't like about Florida.. like the food, the swamp, the poverty, etc. But the debate over the xyz law is not part of the move - debate the whatever school topic in it's own thread just like you talk about high speed rail in its own thread, or anything else.

The Disney move isn't contingent on some new school law.. and if it were, Disney executives are morons if they didn't recognize the political alignment in Florida before this.

ETA - the posts were moved without me knowing it from the quotes.. so now this is more a moot point.

 

[DonaldDoleWhip]

You know it's still dark times for LGBTQ+ people when "the gay lifestyle" comes up unironically.

A big part of the issue is that this law would prevent a kindergartener from discussing anything to do with their family if they have gay parents or a gay sibling...it builds shaming and bullying into the system. Oh, that "About Me" project where you're supposed to draw a picture of your family? Sorry Billy...you can't participate because you have two moms.

This. I have family friends in the Orlando area, previously a lesbian couple. One of them transitioned FTM, but they're still together and love each other. They also have two sons together, probably in second or third grade.

Banning these boys from being able to acknowledge their family, from being able to suggest their home situation is acceptable while children with straight parents are unrestricted, sounds like pure discrimination.

 

[TikibirdLand]

It's not a strawman argument - the person who wrote the bill openly admitted that he thinks gayness is a spreadable condition and that's the reason he wrote it.

Also, please don't misrepresent science. The article itself states that there is no SINGLE genetic cause of a person being gay...that's completely different from saying that genes aren't the cause. It could be a particular combination of genes.

If you are averse to celebrating gay people...are you averse to celebrating Irish people? Or people of color? Or women?

Now, you're just being shrill. Did you read the article or just the headline? Here's a quote from the article:
. new study claims to dispel the notion that a single gene or handful of genes make a person prone to same-sex behavior
As you may be aware, you can't find definitive proof via these studies. They've got to be backed up with follow up studies and other hypothesis.

Note that, regardless of the author, there is no bill that is substantially the same as it was written. Indeed, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams fought bitterly over the wording of the Declaration of Independence.

But, back to your comment about the author. Is that Carlos Smith? Can you point me to a quote where he made that statement? I can't find it.

Again back to your straw-people:
1) Celebrating the gay lifestyle is against Leviticus 18:22. So, I don't support it.
2) Irish people - Do you have anything stating that they shouldn't be? I do draw the line at green beer though...
3) People of Color - Again, there's nothing stating that it's wrong to celebrate Black heritage -- and there is A LOT to cover on that topic. BTW, I don't think you know my race. I will tell you have have 3 adopted children that are non-white. I don't see color; I see their beautiful faces.
4) Women - what are you even talking about? It's International Women's day as I type this. There are tons of great contributions they've made -- throughout history. That goes back even to Lydia. She was a very successful business woman in biblical times (Acts 16:14-16). In fact, it was her -- a woman -- that was the first evangelical and established the first european church.

We can disagree and still be friends. You can be gay, Irish, Black/Hispanic/Pacific Islander, or even a woman and be my friend. I get it, you've made up your mind about people like me. it's OK. I already made my mind up about you; you're always welcome at my house.

 

[DonaldDoleWhip]

1) Celebrating the gay lifestyle is against Leviticus 18:22. So, I don't support it.

I don't follow the Bible, and the First Amendment forbids all levels of government from either advancing or inhibiting religion.

Advancing this belief above all others inhibits my right to practice my beliefs. It's not constitutional, and no state can override that.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

1) Celebrating the gay lifestyle is against Leviticus 18:22. So, I don't support it.

So it's not the science, then?

 

[TikibirdLand]

So it's not the science, then?

I think science supports the biblical interpretation. Care to cite papers to the contrary?

 

[Sir_Cliff]

View attachment 626056

So add this to the list of things people don't like about Florida.. like the food, the swamp, the poverty, etc. But the debate over the xyz law is not part of the move - debate the whatever school topic in it's own thread just like you talk about high speed rail in its own thread, or anything else.

The Disney move isn't contingent on some new school law.. and if it were, Disney executives are morons if they didn't recognize the political alignment in Florida before this.

ETA - the posts were moved without me knowing it from the quotes.. so now this is more a moot point.

I think this is easy to say when laws don't affect you or people you care about. Just moving people around and letting them deal with the conditions wherever the company can get the best tax rate is one way to run a business, I guess.

I will partially agree, though, that Disney executives were morons in not figuring out a better response to how the political alignment in Florida might cause friction not just within the company but beyond when it came to the company's decisions on who to fund and what positions it took. Here is an issue that may be popular with voters in Florida but deeply offensive to many of the creative people they are trying to force to move there from California so they can cut costs, but they seem to blithely dismiss it.

I also do not understand how that Chapek statement was approved by Disney PR. It is so insensitive and tone deaf, with its pointing to stuff like Black Panther and Shang-Chi as a fig leaf also kind of offensive to the people who worked on those projects. Surely someone could have crafted a better response on the salaries they are no doubt earning?

I think science supports the biblical interpretation. Care to cite papers to the contrary?

I don't think science supports the Bible, so it's really a moot point.

 

[TikibirdLand]

I don't follow the Bible, and the First Amendment forbids all levels of government from either advancing or inhibiting religion.

Advancing this belief above all others inhibits my right to practice my beliefs. It's not constitutional, and no state can override that.

nowhere in that statement did I state you couldn't practice your beliefs. I'm just stating that I don't need to celebrate it.

 

[DonaldDoleWhip]

nowhere in that statement did I state you couldn't practice your beliefs. I'm just stating that I don't need to celebrate it.

"Neutrally acknowledge the existence of" ≠ "celebrate"

"Bible says it's wrong, hence it can't be spoken about" ≠ "allow others to practice their beliefs freely"

 

[TikibirdLand]

I don't think science supports the Bible, so it's really a moot point.

apples and tomatoes. We could get into that discussion sometime. I think you'd be surprised. You can support the Gay lifestyle; it's legal. It crosses the line when I'm obligated to celebrate it. I don't celebrate Chanukah. But, I have Jewish friends and I wish them well during their high days. I see that as a better comparison. But, to each his own.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

apples and tomatoes. We could get into that discussion sometime. I think you'd be surprised. You can support the Gay lifestyle; it's legal. It crosses the line when I'm obligated to celebrate it. I don't celebrate Chanukah. But, I have Jewish friends and I wish them well during their high days. I see that as a better comparison. But, to each his own.

Setting aside the phrasing of "the gay lifestyle", no-one is asking you to celebrate anything. This is just about a law about how or if the existence of certain people can be discussed in schools and Disney's official position on that.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Well as a fan, shareholder, and former CM, this is concerning to me that Disney is actively relocating a workforce to Florida, with an ultimatum of move to a new state or lose your job.

That group of people being moved to Florida includes some incredibly talented humans who happen to be LGBT+, and they are now being forced to move to a State that is actively unfriendly towards them, from a State that is far more inclusive.

It's all intrinsically connected, and that's why it makes this discussion confusing and challenging to have.

This is their lives, and that is not political.

I want Cast Members to continue to have their jobs, to help make Disney a great company, and to feel safe and protected.

Living in places where some people disagree with you politically is not a matter of "safety."

I know it's shocking, but Disney has a lot more Republican employees than LGBT employees.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Setting aside the phrasing of "the gay lifestyle", no-one is asking you to celebrate anything. This is just about a law about how or if the existence of certain people can be discussed in schools and Disney's official position on that.

1. That's not what the law says or does. Discussion of sexuality in elementary school is inappropriate, period. It doesn't matter if it's gay, straight, or some kind of halvsie. "Don't say gay" is a caricature. A more accurate description would be "don't talk about sex in front of 9 year olds."

2. Disney need not have any "official position" on the public school curriculum in the state of Florida.

 

[flynnibus]

I think this is easy to say when laws don't affect you or people you care about. Just moving people around and letting them deal with the conditions wherever the company can get the best tax rate is one way to run a business, I guess.

I will partially agree, though, that Disney executives were morons in not figuring out a better response to how the political alignment in Florida might cause friction not just within the company but beyond when it came to the company's decisions on who to fund and what positions it took.

I think people focusing on the new property is insensitive to the reality that Disney already employs over 70k people in florida and that would be impacted just the same.

I find all the rage about chapek's letter over hyped. He basically said "we don't want to draw fire for something that makes no consequence anyway.. instead, look at what we are doing where we can have an impact". He knows Disney really has no sway here.. Is Disney gonna threaten the statehouse to pull out of Orlando? Nope.

I get people may want Disney to rise to their cause - but I think this is inline with Disney has I've seen them before. Quietly supporting the interests of this community in it's own ways of operating and not as an activist organization. Disney has always been business first when it comes to it's politics lobbying - and less so for social topics. This falls under state politics and Disney picks their battles.

 

[flynnibus]

1. That's not what the law says or does. Discussion of sexuality in elementary school is inappropriate, period. It doesn't matter if it's gay, straight, or some kind of halvsie.

2. Disney need not have any "official position" on the public school curriculum in the state of Florida.

Uhh.. do schools operate in a vacuum?

Or did people forget the #1 contributor to great schools is parent and family involvement? Kinda hard to ignore the topic of relationships and humanism in a world that RELIES on families as much as schools do.

 

[lazyboy97o]

apples and tomatoes. We could get into that discussion sometime. I think you'd be surprised. You can support the Gay lifestyle; it's legal. It crosses the line when I'm obligated to celebrate it. I don't celebrate Chanukah. But, I have Jewish friends and I wish them well during their high days. I see that as a better comparison. But, to each his own.

Would you support a bill allowing parents to sue a district if they believe too much discussion of Christmas or Christianity occurs in a classroom?

 

[Sir_Cliff]

1. That's not what the law says or does. Discussion of sexuality in elementary school is inappropriate, period. It doesn't matter if it's gay, straight, or some kind of halvsie.

Then word it so it is not so vague about "age appropriate" discussion of sexual orientation and gender. I see you also mean heterosexuality in all its forms should not be mentioned, so we can agree at least on that being fair.

2. Disney need not have any "official position" on the public school curriculum in the state of Florida.

They do if they have given money to all the sponsors and co-sponsors of the bill. They also might as one of the largest employers in the state who is trying to force a large amount of their employees to move their families into the state.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Now, you're just being shrill. Did you read the article or just the headline? Here's a quote from the article:
. new study claims to dispel the notion that a single gene or handful of genes make a person prone to same-sex behavior
As you may be aware, you can't find definitive proof via these studies. They've got to be backed up with follow up studies and other hypothesis.

Note that, regardless of the author, there is no bill that is substantially the same as it was written. Indeed, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams fought bitterly over the wording of the Declaration of Independence.

But, back to your comment about the author. Is that Carlos Smith? Can you point me to a quote where he made that statement? I can't find it.

Again back to your straw-people:
1) Celebrating the gay lifestyle is against Leviticus 18:22. So, I don't support it.
2) Irish people - Do you have anything stating that they shouldn't be? I do draw the line at green beer though...
3) People of Color - Again, there's nothing stating that it's wrong to celebrate Black heritage -- and there is A LOT to cover on that topic. BTW, I don't think you know my race. I will tell you have have 3 adopted children that are non-white. I don't see color; I see their beautiful faces.
4) Women - what are you even talking about? It's International Women's day as I type this. There are tons of great contributions they've made -- throughout history. That goes back even to Lydia. She was a very successful business woman in biblical times (Acts 16:14-16). In fact, it was her -- a woman -- that was the first evangelical and established the first european church.

We can disagree and still be friends. You can be gay, Irish, Black/Hispanic/Pacific Islander, or even a woman and be my friend. I get it, you've made up your mind about people like me. it's OK. I already made my mind up about you; you're always welcome at my house.

The fact that you keep calling being gay a "lifestyle" makes it clear that you just don't understand it. It's not a "lifestyle". People don't wake up and say "Hmmm...I think I'll try out being gay today". No one can help who they are physically attracted to just like no one can help what color eyes they have. No one would deliberately choose to be the target of bullying, ridicule, isolation, abuse, and violence.

Ahhh...the Bible. The book written by imperfect humans and used as the excuse for oppression and murder for centuries. The only thing that changes is which people to exclude/shame/bully/oppress/abuse/murder.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Others: “Discussing sexuality in elementary school is inappropriate.”

Me: Remembers that I did an entire project on intercourse and human reproduction for my science fair project in elementary school and got a lot of praise for it.