Should Christians Boycott Starbucks?
— Sunday, March 25th, 2012 —
A respected pro-family organization announced this week a boycott of Starbucks coffee. The group, which supports legal protection for traditional marriage, launched the “Dump Starbucks” campaign after a national board meeting in which the Seattle-based coffee company mentioned support for same-sex marriage as a core value of the company. Some Christians are wondering whether we ought to join in the boycott. I say no.
It’s not that I’m saying a boycott in and of itself is always evil or wrong. It’s just that, in this case (and in many like it) a boycott exposes us to all of our worst tendencies. Christians are tempted, again and again, to fight like the devil to please the Lord.
A boycott is a display of power, particularly of economic power. The boycott shows a corporation (or government or service provider) that the aggrieved party can hurt the company, by depriving it of revenue. The boycott, if it’s successful, eventually causes the powers-that-be to yield, conceding that they need the money of the boycott participants more than they need whatever cause they were supporting. It is a contest of who has more buying power, and thus is of more value to the company.
We lose that argument.
The argument behind a boycott assumes that the “rightness” of a marriage definition is constituted by a majority with power. Isn’t that precisely what we’re arguing against? Our beliefs about marriage aren’t the way they are because we are in a majority. As a matter of fact, we must concede that we are in a tiny minority in contemporary American society, if we define marriage the way the Bible does, as a sexually-exclusive, permanent one-flesh union.
Moreover, is this kind of economic power context really how we’re going to engage our neighbors with a discussion about the meaning and mystery of marriage? Do such measures actually persuade at the level such decisions are actually made: the moral imagination? I doubt it.
I’m all for protecting marriage in law and in culture, and I’m for that partly because I believe it is necessary for human flourishing for all people, believers and non-believers alike. But there’s a way to do so that recognizes the resilience of marriage as a creation institution and that rests in the sovereignty of God over his universe.
Those who are scared of losing something are those who seem frantic or shrill or outraged. Those who are fearful resort to Gentile tactics of lording over others with political majorities or economic power. The winners, on the other hand, are able to take a longer view. We’re able to grieve when our neighbors seek to copy marriage without the most basic thing that makes marriage work: the mystery of male and female as one-flesh.
But we don’t persuade our neighbors by mimicking their angry power-protests. We persuade them by holding fast to the gospel, by explaining our increasingly odd view of marriage, and by serving the world and our neighbors around us, as our Lord does, with a towel and a foot-bucket.
We won’t win this argument by bringing corporations to the ground in surrender. We’ll engage this argument, first of all, by prompting our friends and neighbors to wonder why we don’t divorce each other, and why we don’t split up when a spouse loses his job or loses her health. We’ll engage this argument when we have a more exalted, and more mysterious, view of sexuality than those who see human persons as animals or machines. And, most of all, we’ll engage this argument when we proclaim the meaning behind marriage: the covenant union of Christ and his church.
Fear can lead us to cower and to hide a view of marriage that seems archaic and antiquated. That’s why so many evangelical Christians have already surrendered, in their own lives, on such questions as round-the-clock daycare or a therapeutic view of divorce. But fear can also lead us to a kind of enraged impotence, where our boycotts and campaigns are really just one more way of saying, “I’m important; listen to me.” Marriage is too important for that.
A Roman governor thought Jesus was weak when he refused to use imperial means of resistance. But Jesus’ refusal to fight meant just the opposite of what Pilate assumed. “If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting,” Jesus said (Jn. 18:36).
Let others fight Mammon with Mammon. Let’s struggle against principalities and powers with the One thing they fear: a word of faithful witness that doesn’t blink before power, but doesn’t seek to imitate it either.
With the confidence of those who have been vindicated by the resurrection of Christ, we don’t need to be vindicated by the culture. That ought to free us to speak openly about what we believe, but with the gentleness of those who have nothing to prove. Let’s not boycott our neighbors. Let’s not picket or scream or bellow. Let’s offer a cup of cold water, or maybe even a grande skinny vanilla latte, in Jesus’ name.
158 Responses to “Should Christians Boycott Starbucks?”
Trackbacks
- Should Christians Boycott Starbucks? « Legacy Blog
- Monday Morning Mind Dump | Student Pastor Life
- Should we boycott Starbucks? « Strengthened by Grace
- Sparks for Monday, March 26, 2012 | The Daily Disciple
- Destinations « Luggaged
- Worth a Look 3.27.12 – Trevin Wax
- Links I Like | Blogging Theologically | Jesus, Books, Culture, & Theology
- Bits & Pieces (3/27/12) | Better Things Ahead
- A Morning Peacock of Links (3/27) | hobojarpen
- A La Carte (3.27.12) | familylifeatccc
- Stop Opposing Everything (For the Love of God) « Swords and Plows
- Boycott Starbucks? | Civil Commotion
- Boycotts are a legitimate action « Patriactionary
- Miscellaneous Tuesday | Out of the Ordinary Dreamer
- 3.26.12 | SiftingPoint
- Four Links worth checking out. |
- Boycott Starbucks? « Death Nor Life
- 13 Thoughtful Christian Online Articles | FrankGantz.com
- Thursday Encouragements from Bro Chris (March 29) | Vocatus Sanctus
- Moore to the Point – Should Christians Boycott Starbucks? « thereformedmind
- Links of the Week « My World
- Should Chrisitan’s Boycott Starbucks? « Iron Man
- Nephos 9 « Nephos
- “Let’s not boycott our neighbors…” «
- Monday Links and Bullets 4.2.12 « pastorkevinb
- Scopes starbucks | Takethedetour
I’m in agreement with the idea that boycotting usually does not send a message of love, and your post resonates with my feelings about how Christians ought to respond to our current culture with more love and compassion than hate and anger. However, if money spent at Starbucks will actually go to supporting something that goes against our Christian convictions, isn’t that different than just a power struggle? If a man in my neighborhood opened a business and said he is going to make donations to support abortion clinics, I wouldn’t give him my business. I would do this primarily because I do not want to consciously help fund abortions.
I feel like this blog post may potentially put forth a false dichotomy. One in which we either boycott with the aim of hurting a business in a power struggle, or continue to give them our business. I think we have another option: a loving response that says, “I would be a customer, but I can’t in good conscience support something against my religious convictions.” Do we not run the risk of hypocrisy? Drinking a lattes that in some way helps fund something to which we are opposed?
I’m only writing this because I’m not sure where I land on the issue. And as someone who frequents Starbucks, I want to come to a resolved position.
@Lucas Knisely, I totally agree with you… I do not boycott Starbucks, or Home Depot, or any other company as a power play to get them to change their stand on a particular issue. I do it because God has blessed my family with financial resources, and I don’t believe He would then have me give those resources to someone who will use them to promote evil. There are other businesses who will take my money and use it to advance the Kingdom of God.
I will not be spending money at Starbucks.
@Lucas Knisely,
The false dichotomy is exactly where the flaw in this post is. From what I read, it seems like Mr’ Moore’s heart towards God is righteous and good. It does seem like his premise is rather lacking. While the argument itself is rational, it is not a good argument. That false dichotomy does present somewhat of a strawman falacy.
If people are boycotting for the reasons this article says, then I agree, they are missing the heart of Christ. But we are to be in the world not of it. As Christians we should also recognize that we aren’t going to change our country by legislation, but by changing the hearts of the people…one heart at a time.
I won’t be going to Starbucks. Not because I am wanting to prove Christianity’s authority and power, but because I do not willingly give my money to those would use it to war against the Kingdom of God. I would not give money to a woman who wants to use it for abortion. I would not give it to a beggar who will use it for drugs or alcohol. I won’t give it to a company who will support gay marriage. Good luck on your decision.
@Lucas Knisely,
You’re right. Boycott every single corporation that believes something contrary to biblical teaching. I’m assuming you do extensive research on every single restaurant or store you ever do business with, right? Burger king, wal mart, the local grocery, its important to know what these places believe so we can boycott them if we need to.
/sarcasm
@Lucas Knisely, I understand your concern but Christ did say to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s… I’m sure the early Christians didn’t support mass crucifixions, pagan god worship, and orgies; nevertheless that’s where some of the money went. I know I am stretching that verse, because it is actually talking about taxes, but we can still take something from it: that you should really be focused on rendering unto God what is God’s…
@Lucas Knisely,
Very good point Micah Vanella!
@Lucas Knisely,
If we really get down to it, isn’t it poor stewardship to spend that much for coffee, no matter where the money goes?
There’s many people missing the entire point of the article, and I’m honestly not sure how. It’s unbiblical and ignorant to avoid such places that have different viewpoints than you. Am I saying you have to agree with them, in no way. Did Jesus come only to give the good news to everyone who agreed with His viewpoints? No. He also came for people like us, foolish and completely entrenched in the folly of this world. What did you believe when someone came to you and presented you with the gospel? I imagine, but can’t say for sure, that you were like me and boycotted the kingdom of God. So with a lot of love for Christ, the gospel, and for people to be reached with the good news of the Messiah (as well as for people to interpret the Word correctly and not add their petty ideas to it); please stop acting contrary to what is taught and go buy a cup of coffee or a piece of lumber and share the gospel with all. We are called to love, not to hate. Who are we to be so prideful as to pass up a chance to share the gospel with those who need to hear it because they don’t act as it says they should? Of course they don’t, because they don’t believe it! We need to follow Christ, not ourselves. Jesus wept over Jerusalem, He didn’t refuse to buy their coffee.
With much love.
@Micah Vanella, that’s a logical fallacy (see - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque). Don’t try to discredit someone’s point by assuming some sort of personal inconsistency/hypocrisy.
Man, its a good thing we don’t have to boycott Starbucks. I really don’t know how I’d function some mornings without Founder’s Cafe.
@Stuart R. Owens,
:-) I’ve been boycotting Founders ever since they switched from Sunergos.
@Stuart R. Owens,
I’m thankful that they brought Tribute back.
Thanks for writing. You express what I think is a very important concern for the church in America today– “fighting mammon with mammon.” When the church acts as a special interest group vying for power with politicians and businesses, we lose our prophetic voice.
I do have a question that you could answer here or in a later post: what is the best way to “protect marriage in law and culture?” Do you think that the various political campaigns to ban gay marriage truly honor God and preserve marriage? Are our neighbors served by this aspect of the culture war? Thanks again and keep up the good work!
Cute. It doesn’t matter what we believe or that Starbucks is insistant on gay rights as part of their culture. They matter; Christ doesn’t. Just keep pouring that latte.
@Mark Spencer, really dude? really? whats a comment like that doing here, how does that help? You know (at least if you read it) that he has already said the exact opposite:
“we don’t persuade our neighbors by mimicking their angry power-protests. We persuade them by holding fast to the gospel, by explaining our increasingly odd view of marriage, and by serving the world and our neighbors around us, as our Lord does, with a towel and a foot-bucket.”
Come on, he explicitly said what we believe about matters and must be shared through the Gospel calling them to repent not by using our money as bullying power. Let’s think humbly and assume the worst before we post, I know you dont think Moore thinks that Christ doesnt matter at least I hope you do.
@Mark Spencer, o woops I meant assume the best of christians at he end there*
@Mark Spencer, totally meant to say assume the best of Christians at the end there*
A-Men. We should not have boycotted Disney either.
Good post. Thank you.
Not boycotting makes sense, if it’s looked at it from that perspective. But what about the perspective that says, “I do not want to continue to support this company who is actively seeking to promote evil, but will instead support another company”?
I plan on keeping and using my Starbucks card. and God helping me, I will keep on seeking to love my wife as Christ loves the church… Who do we win to the Christ of the Gospel with a boycott?
Loved this article - so glad we have pastors and Christian leaders who have some common sense.
I think this is the biggest reason I do not feel that holding up signs at pro-life rallies is effective, but I am passionate about protecting unborn children just the same.
The way I see it according to the scriptures is that we cannot force unbelievers to act like believers and the biggest way to change society and the atrocities like abortion is for people to come to know and understand the love of Jesus Christ.
They need that message first, and I don’t believe that picket signs do the job.
What are your thoughts, Dr. Moore? Do you believe that is different?
@Michelle,
True, just think of all the power that could be used on our knees rather than screaming holding those signs.
I appreciate this great timely advice when many believes are quick to “boycott” many things. It is easy for us to forget we are on mission, not at “home”.
Dr Moore,
I love this blog and all of your writing. I also love Starbucks coffee. But on this issue, I think there is more here than you present. Here’s why:
You argue that we are fighting mammon with mammon if we boycott Starbucks–that we are entering into a worldly fight on worldly terms, and that Christians should be different. I agree, but I don’t think this is the only issue with Starbucks now.
I agree that we should not find our identity as Christians in triumphalism through things like boycotts. And if we think we are “taking back this country,” as some might say, by strong-arming Starbucks, we are dead wrong. But there is more to it than this.
If Starbucks has so openly identified an agenda that opposes God’s design for marriage, then the Christian who knows about this must still make a decision: should I buy coffee with a green Siren? And this is much more involved than mustering a political majority.
The Christian, who knows Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, is still called to recognize Babylon the Great and we are told, “come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins… (Rev. 18:4).” We are called to be holy, for God is holy. We are called to be different from the sinful norms of this world in order to magnify God.
I agree with you that we should not try to strong-arm Starbucks, but I think we should seriously consider where to buy our coffee now. For me, it would be hard to buy coffee from them if they announced that they were making one of their core values to promote sexual addiction by emphasizing the propagation of the pornography and sex-slave industries. I wouldn’t want to give money to help this cause along. I feel the same way about a company that wants to promote so-called “same-sex” marriage.
I do not want to fight like the devil to please the Lord. Your point is well made, as always. But don’t you think we should consider what patronizing Starbucks means in terms of living lives of holiness in this present age? And, maybe, buy that skinny latté from another coffee shop?
Respectfully,
Ben
@Benjamin O’Toole, Very well said! I agree but would not have been able to have said it so well.
@Benjamin O’Toole, now that is common sense. Well said!
@Benjamin O’Toole, I wholeheartedly agree! I likewise no longer drink Pepsi products. The testing this company does to enhance its flavors by using the remains of aborted babies is beyond belief. I could never live with myself by helping to support it.
@Benjamin O’Toole, thank you for this post - it is insightful and balanced.
@Benjamin O’Toole, you said “exactly” what I was thinking. I don’t drink coffee, but this applies to other companies (e.g., Home Depot) who have felt the need to make a “statement” in support of “same-sex” marriage and other related issues. We really need to think about what we do with the gifts and blessings the Lord has given us.
@Benjamin O’Toole,
Although we are called to come away from “Babylon the Great,” is it really fair to take one or two companies and give them that name? I would argue that, if a Christian feels like a Starbucks boycott is necessary (I’m not talking about just a personal decision, as boycotts usually work by “spreading the word”), there are many other places one needs to come away from. Starbucks does a whole lot to help the poor and oppressed around the world–much more than many other corporations that Christians buy from with no qualms. They try to practice good stewardship, servant leadership, etc.–things that are positive that many other corporations don’t do. And why just stop at corporations? Abortion is legal in the United States–why not simply come away and move to another country? These examples may be a bit extreme, but my point is that there is so much corruption on different levels that trying to come away from it (in the way you describe) would involve leaving the world, as Paul puts it in 1 Corinthians 5:10.
@Benjamin O’Toole, I also want to thank you for putting into words what my heart has said to the Starbucks issue. Winning people to Christ is about being willing for God to use us. That can and does happen at other coffee places, rather than Starbucks. Surprisingly, it also happens at lots and lots of non-coffee places. I don’t think that God is nearly concerned about the “where” as the “willing.” Can it happen at Starbucks? Of course! But does it have to happen at Starbucks? Absolutely not!
And since Starbuck’s willingly made statements that speak loudly against God’s view of marriage, why would we want to financially support them with our hard earned money? So they can finance whatever their next anti-Christian political views a little easier?
As far as other places that also serve anti-christian views, such as Home Depot, McDonald’s, etc: I have taken my lumber and building related business to a local company. But in that process, I also made it a point to write a letter thanking them and letting them know that they gained my business because they have not vocalized their political beliefs to the public, in essence estranging a portion of their clientele.
McD’s was a blessing, since they produce are such substandard food anyway. The only reason I ever went there was because of my children. I know have a valid reason not to frequent them. Again, a well written letter thanking some of McD’s competitors (at the corporate level as well as local) was written. My children? I explained my reasoning to them: Other than missing the “Playland,” there hasn’t been any negative impact.
It is my personal opinion that it doesn’t make good business sense to mix personal and business beliefs; vocalize political positions. It’s bound to create disharmony to someone who might buy your product. And isn’t that what businesses and corporations are supposed to be about? Selling a product?
We all have the legal right in America to believe what we want. But let’s not confuse that with the responsibilities that we have towards the God of the Universe. He has told us to seek out righteousness and holiness. It doesn’t seem righteous nor holy to purchase a want (definitely not a need) from a business that thumb’s it’s nose at God and His people. His laws are far greater than America’s rights or voice.
As a former serial boycotter, thanks for the great explanation of why these are ineffective and a poor witness. Plus, I would currently feel hypocritical because I would also have to boycott my employer!
Boycott Starbucks, but do it because you can save a ton of money just buying your coffee from the grocery store!
Thank you for sharing! You successfully & lovingly articulated a point if view that many Christians perceive as weakness, when it is truly strength.
I’m wondering if you might elaborate on the need to protect marriage “in law & culture” so that humanity may flourish, beyond the obvious procreation angle.
This is a topic that comes up frequently in our area & I’m looking for ways to help people articulate their biblical position without attacking those of the opposite.
Thank you!
Very good. Very.
God explains lots of reasons why our battle isn’t political or financial in nature. The God I worship could put a stop to all this in an instant, if He wanted to. But Romans says that there ARE people that He WILL give over to depraved mind, and His hints at how the last days will be, bear striking resemblance to what’s going on today.
I disagree. We should honour God by the way we spend our money. This boycott is an attempt to educate the public about the company’s anti-family political agenda. And it encourages Christians to stop enabling that agenda by the profits Starbucks makes through our purchases there. I believe both are legitimate goals. I encourage you to shop elsewhere and thereby make a positive statement of support for the family. Let’s make it a loosing proposition to fund and support perversity. Not with my money. I’ll buy a cup of coffee elsewhere, thank you very much.
@Cradle Anglican, they aren’t a political institution though, they sell coffee. Same with the chick-fil-a boycott at that college on the east coast because the owner doesn’t support gay marriage. The point is Chick-fil-a sells chicken and Starbucks sell over-priced drinks in oddly worded sizes (cant be too serious on a blog), these companies don’t run the white house or make policy decisions. Anyways i boycott Starbucks just cause I want to order my drinks in medium and large without being corrected.
@Cradle Anglican, Good point. We should never KNOWINGLY be enablers of something that goes directly against what God’s Word teaches.
@Cradle Anglican,
Actually, your statement that they “don’t run the whitehouse” is easily disputed. Starbucks openly supported the Mr. Obama’s campaign for congress in 2008, and while he has called on CEO’s to temporarily stop giving money to political campaigns, this is also an attempt to use their financial power to influence government policy. Go to maplight.org and search on starbucks and look at all the money donated by employees of that company to liberal political causes. This doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface on how much money is given by companies like Starbucks to promote evil. It makes me never want to give another dime to Starbucks and it has everything to do with not giving my financial resources to those who openly oppose righteousness.
@Cradle Anglican, you really cant justify that they run the whitehouse because they supported a campaign. they are not the head of the conspiracy.
@Cradle Anglican, I agree 100 per cent with your statements. I was a big Starbucks coffee drinker, but cannot, in good conscience be contributing to Starbucks profits. Their coffee is over-priced anyway!
It is a false argument to suggest that one must either boycott or defend traditional marriage in some other manner. We can do both. Prayer and the demonstration of loving kindness does not prevent me from withdrawing support for an organization whose core values are antithetical to my understanding of scripture and godly living. As Jesus aptly phrased it “he that is not with me is against me.” Matt. 12:30, Luke 11:23. Why would any Christian intentionally direct resources to a company that takes a public stand contrary to their values?
@andre townsel, “Why would any Christian intentionally direct resources to a company that takes a public stand contrary to their values?” sounds just like the question asked to Jesus in matthew 22:17 “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” to which Jesus answered “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Caesar definitely had conflicting core values with them. The other thing to keep in mind with your quotation of “he that is not with me is against me.” is that if we apply to this business transactions (which would be out of context) we would have to go Amish and make all our own stuff because almost every company is run by unregenerate sinners. Keep in mind 1 Corinthians 5 after talking about not associating with the sexually immoral Paul says in v10 “not all meaning the sexually immoral of the world, or the greedy and swindlers (sounds Starbucks huh?lol), or idolaters since then you would have to leave the world.” instead it is those who bear the name of Christ who are held to a higher standard. They however are sinners, just like we were before He called us, so we should expect them to sin and be hostile to God. Should it really surprise us that a secualr company run by unregenerate men is hostile to the things of God? No.
@andre townsel, Jesus’ direction to pay taxes is a demonstration of our respect for authority which is clearly supported in scripture. There is also clear support that if man’s law contradicts godly principles that it is God that we adhere to first in the most peaceable way that we can. However, volunteering support for an organization is a completely different circumstance. It is true that there are ungodly people in every industry. That is not the point. Here, we have a corporate citizen that has chosen to take sides, and has expressed its worldview through a modification of its Core Values. I’ve never been a strong supporter of boycotts but I support those who choose to spend their money in a conscientious way. I have long supported Starbucks, ignorantly, but will choose to get my half-pump mocha from somewhere else. We cannot judge those who would continue support in light of this change as we are all in need of God’s grace.
This was a really good article. Some points that could help strengthen it from Scripture are:
We pay taxes to the government by God’s command. right? Well at the time this command was given Rome was just as corrupt as we are yet they were commanded to pay taxes?
So if God allows us to pay taxes to the government which is corrupt then why would He not be okay for us going to eat or shop at a pagan place?
Also take into consideration that Paul never condemns the brother for buying and eating meat which was offered to idols. He only rebukes them for making their brother stumble. How is this situation any different? For the meat offered to idols went to support pagan temples.
A well reasoned, impassioned and principaled plea. I agree there is a time and a place for boycotts, but not this place, and not while I’m getting my Americano.
This is a very good argument and I agree in principle with much of what you say. I would be interested, though, to hear how you would respond to the very simple argument that by continuing to buy from Starbucks you are effectively / implicitly helping them to promote their views on sexuality. Could not a quiet withdrawl of custom - expressed with a heavy heart - from Starbucks be an appropriate response? That is, while one doesn’t have to go down the screaming, picketting route - some form of protest might be valid?
In Christ
Peter Orr
PS. For me this particular case is a moot point as I live in Melbourne - a city of Coffee snobs who would never dream of drinking Starbucks coffee - whatever their position on human sexuality!
Dr. Moore,
As usual, this is a wonderful and helpful response to a contemporary ethics question. We need a president at MBTS with this sort of wisdom. I will read your blog regardless :)
@Kole Farney, I looked all over for a “Like” option for this comment. Unfortunately, this comment will have to do.
Hear, hear!
Yup. Agree.
Just to clarify, marriage is a life-long, but not permanent, union. See, for example, Mark 12.25.
Thank you for this. I for one, choose not to go to Starbucks because I don’t like their coffee.
“This boycott is an attempt to educate the public about the company’s anti-family political agenda.”
From the perspective of this non-believer, the boycott is an attempt to intimidate a company that has made a principled move of supporting one of the numerous types of family that exist notwithstanding the boycotters’ dislike. It’s difficult to imagine the sort of move that might convince people who support same-sex marriage, and the reality of gay lives, that they shouldn’t. Boycotting a company that has made a point of stating its support for same-sex marriage isn’t that.
@Randy McDonald, my kingdom for a “Like” button! ;)
If the point of a boycott is persuasion, this one failed before it began.
Yes, boycott Starbucks -
They are over rated and over priced
I used to think that we should boycott everything. Girl Scouts (b/c of Planned Parenthood), Starbucks, Disney, Ford, Pepsi and its restaurant chains… but then I started thinking. The only time Paul told believers to boycott the meat vendors who sold post sacrificial meats was if it offended a weaker brother. There is no real discussion of social action or civil disobedience as a response to sin. Starbucks and Pepsi and Disney are sinful businesses doing what sinners do. The only way we can possibly have a voice that way is if every. single. Christian. signs on. And if we boycott one then we have to boycott the others or it looks like we just keep the ones we like. Neither of those are going to happen. Buying a latte or a Pepsi or a girl scout cookie does not equate with buying a raffle ticket at a Gay Pride fundraiser. We should not withdraw from the world just because they sin, we should keep a pure an holy presence in the world so they can know the One who didn’t sin. Don’t boycott Starbuck, hold a men’s book study there.
@Jonathan, exactly
Fabulous article, thank you.
The encouragement that it is our everyday behavior, the ins and outs of our normal lives, and conformity to the character of Christ that engages this, and all conversations is timely, I think.
The Scriptures never call us to anything like boycotts, but rather instruct us to keep our everday conduct pure amongst the unbelievers (1 Pet 2), to let our good deeds shine before men light a lamp on a table (Matt 5), and to live quietly, mind our own affairs, and work with our hands (1 Thess 4), all so that the world around us will see our good, God reflecting actions and come to glorify Him as well. It never says anything about trying to force or coerce others into good behavior.
I fear that when we take up such actions as boycotts, we tend to turn our faith, as was implied in the article, into something that transational, that is bought and sold. We become, in a way, those vendors who had their tables turned over by The Christ Himself.
How do we engage the marriage conversation n today’s society? By marrying, and staying married, according to the Scriptures. How do we engage the most pressing social issues of our time? By feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and imprisoned,and comforting the widow orphan. We engage by loving our neighbor, not by making them love us or even each other.
Thanks for sharing your viewpoint. I personally was convicted, and challenged, and it was not an easy decision. You see I was addicted to Starbucks coffee. However, as best I could hear God’s Spirit, I sensed I was not to buy Starbucks coffee and longer–the nector of heaven, from a company that radically espouses the a practice that God considers an abomination. Our problem is our culture is so PC we attempt to make arguments that simply boil down to tolerating sin and hope we come off as reasonable gracious people. Yes, love people, but we probably need to see a little more Wesley, Spurgeon, Moody etc., in our taking a stand against sin. I personally didn’t go on any public boycott. People noticed my Tim Horton’s cup instead of my Starbucks cup and I responded accordingly. I wasn’t majoring on this by radically going after Starbucks; I simply took a stand of conscience. The difference in my thinking as opposed to all the other potential evil in my cupboards, my furniture, my roofing materials etc., was that Starbucks came out and aggressively underlined this publically, heralding this as a stand they were willling to take knowing that our PC culture wouldn’t say much (other than a few who speak of a boycott or choose not to buy the product any longer). They also couldn’t care what Scripture has to say about this destructive life-style (yes I said destructive); as I would say that abortion is destructive, adultery is destructive and alcholism is destructive. The sin is destructive; the people are to be loved, and challenged to repent and believe the gospel of Jesus Christ. Just a few thoughts from a guy who, like you, are hopefully trying to walk that tight rope of advocating both God’s grace and God’s holiness. Pastor John
@John Moriarty, Best comment on this I have read so far. Totally agree with everything you said.
@John Moriarty, liked your comment, but do a little digging into the background of the Tim Hortons coffee company and you will see plenty of core practices which to consume their coffee would be to “tolerate sin”. just saying, you might want to start growing and roasting your own beans and brewing at home to truly stake that stand.
Also i found it ironic that you included alcoholism in your comment when the founder of Tim Hortons (tim horton) was killed in a car accident while drunk at the wheel!
@John Moriarty,
Well said. I very rarely go to Starbucks but now that I know what they are actively promoting, I will be sure not to go. God’s money can be better spent elsewhere.
Amen. While I appreciate certain stances, sometimes the “boxing” stance is wrong and sends the wrong message.
But to be consistent, we would have to research every business with whom we deal, all their suppliers, all their employees, and even, ahem, their shareholders. Can you imagine, “I can’t buy Tootsie Rolls because one of their shareholders is gay/communist/muslim/etc. ???
Or, the alternator module in my Ford was made by a company that pays insurance for married gay couples, so I can’t buy a Ford.
When I decide to not buy or patronize a certain product or business, my only objective is that company will not be getting my money.
I’m not trying to fight them or hurt them or change them or make any kind of statement. I fully expect the company to keep doing whatever it’s doing that provoked my decision. Because, after all, they’re just unbelievers acting like unbelievers.
The only difference is, they’ll be doing it without my help.
So, my “boycotts” are 100 percent effective.
Boycotts are often a lazy substitute for a serious study and thought about the Christian faith. Rather than building our joy in our salvation through knowledge of the Truth, actions such as boycotts can often make us believe we are standing firm for the truth - but one which we scarcely know and invest ourselves on a day-to-day basis.
A boycott is wrong, biblically wrong. As a matter of conscience and wisdom I will abstain quietly from purchasing Starbucks (2 Timothy 2:22-26).
I agree with Russell Moore. Truthfully, what is the real result of activism in most cases? Not much. A lot of hype and shouting and righteousness, however little changes most of the time. But there are other options than straight protest…in this case other places to purchase our morning coffee, some without the lines (like my own kitchen.) For instance, take a look at Equal World Coffee - one tiny company actually working for God in helping others. This company is very small, however its mission is to assist rural Rwandan villages in getting their exceptional coffee product to market so they have a local sustainable business to rebuild their society. Sounds like a shameless plug, I know (yes, I know the owners). But my point is about options, not blind protest. Incidentally, the Rwandans in these villages will not sell to Starbucks.
@Paul Matosky, If you agree with Dr. Moore, how can you approve of the Rwandans “boycotting” Starbucks?
I agree with Dr. Moore.
What I always wonder is; do people know the “agenda” of Wal-Mart or Coca-Cola? What about The Children’s Place or Five Guys. Nobody seems to have a problem shopping at Old Navy or eating at Chipotle. Apple products are a must have for a Christian, I think.
We ought to be aware of where our money goes all the time. We ought to be good stewards of our time, money, and resources to advance the Kingdom. We ought to value people, not corporations. Let’s make our decisions based on love and not buy into politics, agendas and things that don’t matter in the scope of eternity.
This is just my humble opinion. Kingdom living is different than the way non-Christians live. I am just suggesting things. I want to raise awareness. I mean it all out of love.
P.S. If you’re going to boycott Starbucks, do it because it cost too much and that is ba stewardship. Or get in line and buy a cup, loving everyone and building relationships with the barista all for God’s glory. Either way. Cheers.
I liked Stabucks a lot. But with what they started supporting and I don’t support. We don’t agree on the subject. Let me tell you what we did. We went online and bought Tim Hortons. They support family and really when I was in Russia they didn’t have S. in that part of country. Our friend brought us some Tim Hortons and I found that quality is much better to my surprise)))
I boycott Starbucks because I don’t like the taste, and too much caffeine causes anxiety.
I have friend that works at Starbucks and led an Islamic man from Africa to Christ. I think we need to give God a little more credit on his ability to defend himself.
Great article.
For those who are concerned that by supporting Starbucks by purchasing their coffee, which, in turn, apparently supports same-sex marriage: How far are you willing to take this?
The Christian right has demonized homosexuals by making their sinfulness far worse than then a heterosexual who is a pathological liar, or the married man who continually commits adultery, or the successful businesswoman who has deep pride in her success and lusts for more wealth. Although Starbucks and other commercial entities may not publically support those activities, your purchase at any given store may certainly feed each of those sins. We are all idol factories and the sin of a homosexual is no greater than that of you or me who have consistently struggled with lust, pathologically lied, or committed adultery in deed or in mind. All of these are perversions of God-created things that were meant to be for His glory and for our good. Such is the nature of sin. So if the CEO of ABC Company is an adulterer or the CEO of DCE Global is prideful of her success and lusts for more wealth, are we to stop making purchases at that store because we do not wish to support their sinfulness?
If a missionary took up residence in India or Nepal where no Gospel presence was, is it wrong for the missionary to purchase food, clothing, or housing from local vendors if the beneficiary of those funds are Hindu and use their daily wages to purchase an idol for their home or give to their local temple?
Be careful with the answer, because there is a line between law and grace that can be crossed here and by moralizing people and coercing them into a more “Godly” lifestyle, you are ultimately telling them that their actions will make them more or less holy and acceptable in God’s eyes.
I wholeheartedly believe in the sanctity of marriage as designed by God to display Christ’s love for His church. I cherish it and love it tremendously. However, sin is sin and whether it is publicly supported or displayed or whether it is acted upon in private does not change the fact that the Gospel is the only thing that will redeem a broken world — not their actions or ours but only Christ’s. Sitting in a Starbucks day in and day out, getting to know the barista’s lives, being the presence of Christ in that mission field and sharing the good news of a crucified and risen Savior will change hearts to cherish what God cherishes. Only the Gospel can do that. Avoiding the mission field altogether or forcing them to act as a Gospel-redeemed life should act, only without the Holy Spirit and without a Gospel-driven heart, only leads them to a false gospel.
I agree with Moore in that we shouldn’t be shrill or come across as hateful when we decide to keep our money in our wallet in response to companies that support un-Biblical principles. But i vehemently (and not so respectfully) disagree that we should continue spending our money at businesses who use part of our money to support activities that are an abomination to the Lord (doubt me on that word “abomination”? Look it up in the Bible). Furthermore (no pun intended) i believe those who agree with him are doing so out of comfort. Who wants to give up a favorite coffeee spot, or hardware store? Especially if they are the only game around, or if their product is most pleasing to us? It often costs us our worldly comforts to gain God’s approval.
Weak sauce, Dr Moore. It’s not about power, or winning. It’s about values, character and faith. We ought not to wear “boycott” on our sleeve, however our walk should match our talk, unless our identity is found in the cup we carry.
This was a very nuance take on the reflexive anti-issue tendency of Christians. I particularly find the boycott as power explanation very convincing. It’s great. Definitely tweeting this.
My, how times change so quickly. The pastor at the church I was attending posted that Howard Schultz’s book was the best one he and his staff read last year. Howard was being billed as the downtrodden christian businessman who had to cater to his loudest, albiet 11%, customer base and not attend a conference labeled as a Christian conference.
And now this. Who can I listen to these days? Now i must give a disclaimer here. I attend a church that meets in a coffee house not named Starbucks. I have quietly boycotted Starbucks for many months now, not because I like Sozo Coffeehouse better and not just on Sunday mornings. It’s just that a stop at Circle K gets me a cup of coffee at 1/3 the price.
Now for the boycott question…… If I decide to not visit an establishment because I do not agree with their religious or social views, I do it for myself. One reason why I dont go to Spencers TV here in Mesa. I do not make a scene over it. I tell people I have influence over as to why I do not frequent the establishment. But by calling attention to my “Boycott”, I am calling attention, even negative attention to my self and not my beliefs or views.
Firstly, I would like to say this is a great thought provoking article. I think there are definately causes in which a boycott is warranted. I’m not sure this is the case however we are responsible for acting on the knowledge we have been given. I believe it is a fallacy to use the argument that because other establishments support evil we must be consistent in our patronage or lack of it. There is a big difference between a company giving to objectionable sources and a company making public announcements about their core values. I do not think a person can, with good conscience, give money to an organization that publicly supports values that are an anathema to their own core values.
This sounds like someone who just wants to justify their Starbucks addiction to me. If you wanna go to Starbucks then go but don’t try and make it spiritual. If you wouldn’t hand money to a homosexual to pay for their travel to get married then why would you give it to Starbucks to fund gay rights. I as a Christian have gay friends that know my belief on their lifestyle. I still love them but I would not condon their behavior ever. To each his own. If you want Starbucks then go but don’t tell me I shouldn’t boycott them when their pushing an agenda that is totally against Christs.
Very thoughtful. Thank you.
Amazing job on explaining your view on this controversial subject! LOVED IT! I have always wondered if people really think they are changing people’s mind by yelling obscenities, or displaying violent behavior? We know it does not, and quite frankly we are to display love as Jesus did. That means we rely on HIM and know that we can believe in the sacred of marriage but we aren’t supposed to yell at people by participating, boycotting, and showing people who may be gay or lesbian that they don’t deserve respect and love? They are our brothers and sisters and God is their father. We don’t have to agree, we can vote against it, fine but sometimes further than that is going a bit far because you begin to show people they aren’t accepted, and if they wanted to turn to Christ they surely aren’t doing it while you are telling them they are wrong. Honestly perception is reality. Maybe some don’t know Christ, I know I didn’t, and until I was shown love and compassion by an amazing family I could not see what anyone talked about when it came to God.
AMAZING FACT: I was show love and compassion which opened my heart to be filled with Christ. I didn’t have people throw things or yell, that never would have changed my mind, it would have proved me right about how I thought everyone was especially Christians. So maybe a little more love, a little less not wanting to associate with people who aren’t like you, SHOW them through action how JESUS loves them!!!!
THANK YOU MR. MOORE! AMAZING AS ALWAYS!
If you really want to use your conscience when buying coffee, buy fair trade.
I would suggest we examine this issue in light of Romans 1:18-31.
If patronage implies that I ‘agree with’ or ‘approve of’ a persons or a business’ activities or statements, then my patronage of any such person or business could definitely be understood as encouragement.
Am I ‘judging’ them in the forensic sense? No, that has already happened. In fact all sinners are found guilty. I am judging in the sense that they have openly stated that their positions are actively and radically opposed to what God has decreed.
If they had not made a public statement of their stance, I could freely partake of their wares and been none the wiser- my conscience would be clear.
However since they have on numerous occasions published their position and intentions concerning a number of issues which are clearly not compatible to Christ, and in fact are actively supporting them politically and financially, I am bound by Gods word and conscience to not support them in any way.
This is very comparable to what Paul was speaking of concerning meat sacrificed to idols in 1st Corinthians, from a number of perspectives.
I don’t want the unbeliever to be confused about what God says.
(And no, I’m not going to engage with the ‘barista’ about the gospel at his/her place of work, because getting them fired for having non job related conversations will probably not win them over…)
I don’t want to stumble a ‘weaker brother’ who is confused about whether or not he should patronize a business that actively promotes ungodliness.
As far as being ‘polite’ Christians is concerned, Jesus Himself was not considered ‘polite’, nor was John the Baptist, or the Apostles. Even Timothy was beaten to death for actively and loudly protesting against a pagan festival involving gross sexual immorality.
Read Foxe’s book of martyrs and observe the humble resistance of those who gave their lives to honor God and His word.
I stopped going to starbucks - and a number of other businesses a long time ago for these reasons. To me anything else is hypocrisy.
Is denying starbucks - or any other lobbyist or supporter of ungodly behavior going to change their beliefs or behavior?
Not likely, but maybe they’ll have less room in their ‘bottom line’ to work this kind of maliciousness.
At least they can’t call me a hypocrite for denouncing their policies while chugging down their products…
We must not consciously sacrifice truth for the sake of a cup of coffee.
If our preferences cause us to compromise our Gospel for the world on any level, before long it will demand that that we cave in on every level.
“You can not drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the Lord’s table and of the table of demons.” 1Cor 10:21
We must not only be strong in what we stand for - but also what we stand against. Unfortunately the Church has all but lost her voice because of compromise and hypocrisy.
As I ponder this, I have two questions for those who argue against buying from Starbucks to avoid their money supporting a company that supports same-sex marriage:
1) Should a Christian business owner terminate employment if an employee is known to donate a part of his paycheck in support of same-sex marriage? If the logic is, “I can’t put my money in the hands of someone who will use it in this way,” why doesn’t that apply here? Why not give the employee his final check–render what is due–but then send him packing?
2) Is there a difference between declining to shop at Starbucks personally, and working to rally support for a large-scale boycott of Starbucks? It seems that we’re failing to distinguish between an individual refusing to shop somewhere due to conscience, and boycotting.
Instead of boycotting Starbucks, I think we should buy MORE Starbucks, under one condition…. Every time you visit a Starbucks either engage is a short conversation with another customer while standing in line or with a worker about the Lord. Could be something simple, but this approach would be MUCH more effective, don’t you think?
Mr. Moore, several of us Christians in New England noted your article about NOT boycotting Starbucks including the missing photo I found below:
http://www.usmansheikh.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/head-in-the-sand.jpg
God bless you and wake you up to impacting the world around you for Christ. Hopefully you have a sense of humor because I am certain your article was meant to be funny, right?
While I am in agreement with Russell, I think there is another issue at work here; and, that is, at what point do we draw the line in buying merchandisefrom/supporting businesses that are not Christian and do not promote a Chrisitian lifestyle or worldview? Do we boycott/not buy from certain supermarket chains that are owned by Mormons, because that money is used to promote Mormonism? Do we boycott/not buy from certain corporations that allow employees to include domestic partners (which means anyone, married or not) on their insurance; because this is a form of support for anyone who is not legally married, therefore a support of fornication. Do we boycott/not buy from companies because their advertising contains soft porn? Do we boycott/not buy from certain companies because we are supporting their corporate greed? Is it just Starbucks we boycott/not buy from because of their support of homosexuality, when many major corporations which supply us with a bevy of products, (many necessary) are already supporting homosexuality or are promoting its lifestyle, or do we boycott them all?
Why single out just Starbucks when there are many more we could lump in with them? Honestly, it smacks of self-righteousness, and, in many instances, publicity seeking; in addition it gives many companies great publicity and sympathy from the secular public that they couldn’t purchase with advertising dollars. Much as in Romans 14, if you find out something about a corporation that wounds your conscience, and it would be going against your conscience to purchase their products, then by all means do not buy from them. But again, at what point will we draw the line. For many that line has been homosexualtiy, but there are many more non-Christian agendas that most every company is behind, even your locally owned businesses.
Although Mr. Moore does make some good points, shouldn’t we be individually seeking the Lord for His direction in our own lives? After all, as Christians, the scriptures talk to us about being sensitive to our consciences, & what is a sin for one may not be for another. If the Spirit convicts one not to buy from Starbucks, what man should insist otherwise. Likewise if one’s conscience isn’t convicted by the spirit, he is free to buy. Seems from the comments already posted, that is the case!
Dr. Moore, you have advanced a number of straw man arguments and a false dichotomy of boycott vs. love and reason. Here is just one straw man argument: “The argument behind a boycott assumes that the “rightness” of a marriage definition is constituted by a majority with power.” Have you asked the boycott leader and confirmed this view?” Good grief, if that is the best you can do for an argument against boycotts, you have already lost it.
And as for the several commenters here who seem to think that the command to pay taxes to Caesar also includes a requirement to buy Starbucks products, what an awful exegesis.
@Robert Simpson, Thank you, Mr. Simpson, for pointing out that without logic, without formal rules for engaging in discourse, dialogue is meaningless, nonsensical. There are many OTHER logical problems with Dr. Moore’s expressed position–you’ve named but a few. Seldom have I encountered such misdirecting and illogical drivel expressed so eloquently. Unfortunately, too many of these readers were easily persuaded by so many pretty words.
I get everything that has been said on here, on both sides of the fence, but it seems to me that it just opens up the wound of consumerism. Most of your clothes are made in other countries in sweatshops by child laborers. God only knows what companies like Apple have going on not to mention the thousand other products we use everyday. Is there a line that gets drawn? I don’t know. What do you folks think?
I have boycotted businesses in the past for advertising on ungodly TV shows but to boycott businesses who support gay marriage would mean that I would have to boycott almost every business. Microsoft software is invasive in this society and Microsoft supports gay marriage. I would have to give up my computer. I will pray about it and seek God for what He will have me do.
Interesting. According to this article, we shouldn’t discipline our children either. Of course we would all agree that it is more important to win the heart of our children in obedience to God’s laws, however if the child is not interested in discussing why their behavior (say for instance, hitting their sibling) is wrong, then a loving parent must take action. I suppose too, that a parent disciplining, (in love) could also be considered a power struggle. But does that mean (AFTER attempting to dialogue lovingly with the child why his behavior is wrong) that the parent does not discipline? The church SHOULD lovingly engage this culture in healthy dialogue over this issue, and should also demonstrate godly, beautiful marriages, but in a world that often seems resistant (to put it mildly!) to even engage in discussion about this issue, do we stand back and do nothing? Or do we put our money where our mouth is??
Liberty of conscience should be considered when making blanket statements from both sides. We’re exiles in Babylon, and sometimes we’ll have to deal with Babylon’s vices. I’ll ejoy starbucks, freely and joyfully because God has given me some good coffee through the ‘mask’ of the barista fulfilling his calling given to God by his common grace
I think it’s an all-or-nothing issue to consider. If one chooses to boycott a coffee company, then perhaps they should be prepared to do the same for the operating system on their computer, favorite search engine, airplane they fly on, and more. Read more about this story:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Business+playing+role+drive+marriage/6342523/story.html
http://www.king5.com/home/related/Washington-United-for-Marriage-Business-Coalition-138062488.html
Or consider the corporations who are LGBT inclusive:
http://www.hrc.org/apps/buyersguide/index.php#.T3IAMxHHPd5
In John 17, the High Priestly Prayer (just prior to the crucifixion) of Jesus is the call to action for us all who are part of His church. Verses 20-21 is what we need more than ever.
The two matters of concern here are not, in my opinion, matters for mass public action. I don’t favor promoting public boycotts nor have I supported federal marriage laws. There are strong biblical teachings that indicate that these are matters of personal responsibility. Let’s take a look at what, I believe, the bible teaches.
The basic issue is, what is marriage, who established it and who has authority over it? Marriage was established in the Scripture, in Genesis 2:24, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” ESV The purpose was to set the foundational unit of society, the family. Man and woman were to come together, actually becoming one flesh as God’s vehicle of procreation. The family unit was, and is, the building block of all society, including the Church. To my knowledge, God has not granted any human authority, personal or governmental, to alter, control, or regulate the family unit, nor to define marriage.
To place this into the current, American, perspective, there is no authority stated nor implied in the Constitution over marriage. The Constitution of the United States is basically a negative document that grants minimal and very restricted powers to the federal government. It has no powers or authorities other than those clearly enumerated in Article I, Section 8. All powers and authorities not clearly granted to the federal government “…are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Tenth Amendment. The have also established states to which they have granted powers or authorities. The powers and authorities granted by the consent of the governed are designed to direct and control all levels of government formed by the people.
Unfortunately we have at some point had authority over marriage usurped by the states and by the federal government, or foolishly granted to these bodies through regulation. This was apparently to gain some sort of preferential treatment or taxation over single people. We certainly have plenty of reason to regret having committed this error or allowed such egregious usurpation.
Finally on the marriage matter, I don’t believe God needs help “…protecting marriage in law and in culture…” I believe He needs his children to be obedient to his Word!
Now to address the Starbucks issue in particular, or use of our purchasing power in general. This is very clearly addressed in both Matthew and Luke’s gospels. They have reported identically, thus, to me, indicating their importance, of Jesus stating, “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” ESV. Pastors and Christian financial counselors will tell us that we can see what our priorities are in life by looking at our check record and our credit card statements. These document will tell us where our heart is. Then we must determine in our minds where our heart should be and be guided accordingly. This, to me, is a very personal exercise and judgment to be made. It is not a corporate judgment to be made in the public square. I certainly would not refrain from expressing what I was going to do about Starbucks or Home Depot or many other entities, if asked, but I am not going to promote a general boycott nor picket these businesses.
So, if both cases, I would ask, “Where is your heart?”
Amen! Great thoughts sir! Too often Christians are ready to engage the culture as the people of the culture engage each other, without understanding our position, placement, or purpose as the Church. Paul talks about in 1 Cor 1-2 about how the Gospel is not easily understood by many. He says that many will see it as outright foolishness.
May we measure success and our faithfulness to the LORD on obedience to His Word, to Truth; not to what we can see or think we should be able to see (usually as measured by Church History, the current culture, etc). Money, politics, and power will not change the world for Christ- Only His message of eternal life and forgiveness of sins to all those who trust Him for it, all based on His death and resurrection, and by means of His grace through faith…
Qoheleth.
A lot of people said something to the effect of “shop somewhere else,” which in the case of Starbucks is definitely valid because there’s always somewhere else to get coffee. However, not everyone lives in a place with a lot of options.
I think it’s impossible to boycott without being hypocritical because anywhere you go there is the possibility that your money might go toward something you disagree with. Have you ever found a grocery store that doesn’t sell unwholesome magazines at the checkout line? But you have to buy groceries! I think Brian Jacobson’s comment about “Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s” was very applicable.
I think the better question to ask would be: Should Christians financially contribute to a business that actively supports the legitimization of immorality? This blog makes some good points, but I will not help such a company to succeed and make a profit. Otherwise, what are we going to support next? Planned Parenthood? All the same arguments against a boycott of Starbucks could be made in regard to Planned Parenthood.
There are times I boycott. I will not buy chocolate that is produced by slaves, for example. I do that for my own conscience as well as with hopes that enough of us doing so will make a difference.
I look at it like “going green”… We can think ‘I can’t make a difference so I will do nothing”… or we can think “I can’t do it all but I will do what I can”….
I have to disagree with this one. My decision for boycotting an establishment such as Starbucks is not an attempt to ‘put them out of business’, or to muscle them into pandering to my beliefs. It is rather because I cannot, with a clear conscience, have my money go towards supporting gay marraige if I can help it.
@Greg West, Ditto for me. As much as I enjoy my Folgers/Starbucks blend (at home; I don’t have a local Starbucks so I get mine from the grocery store), I’ll be looking for an alternative. Wonder if there’s any dirt on Dunkin’ Donuts brand?
I think the dilemma of whether or not it’s ok to buy any Starbucks products is parallel to that of “buying meat sacrificed to idols” in 1 Corinthians. If a Christian believes he is displeasing Christ by buying coffee knowing that part of the proceeds are being wrongly used to promote something sinful, then for that person it is sin to buy the coffee since it’s being done against his conscience. (If he knew what evils are committed by some people or corporations who get any of our money from any purchase, he may never buy anything ever again!) But for the believer that’s been given the grace to be freed into the mindset Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians 10, that “the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof”, it’s of no real offense to Christ that he buy and drink the coffee, which is something the Lord intended for us to give thanks to Him for.
How about we all make coffee at home and give the other $3-4 a day to missions? In a month, that’s $100. Priorities.
I appreciate the spirit of this post, and I agree that boycotts do NOT accomplish good Christian purposes. While I affirm any Christian who has the conviction they should not support a company because of their policies and practices, I believe it is inappropriate for those same believers to tell others that they too should stop supporting Company A, B, or C. Those are personal convictions, but NOT mandates for all believers. Unfortunately, in the world we live in, if Christians were to stop “supporting” every company and business with less-than godly principles and philosophies, then we would all have to move to Montana and grow our own food and make our own clothes!
@Nicholas Vafiades, I for going to Montana! Good idea Nicholas!
A boycott is not only a “display of power, particularly of economic power.” A boycott is also a display of conscience. A boycott does not always need to be belligerent and bellicose. Just someone deciding not to patronize a particular establishment. I am not sure why such a decision would somehow be indicative of failure of the moral imagination. There is nothing about the Christian Faith that compels me to consume $4 coffee just to prove that I love my neighbors.
Boycott or not, but there is even less cause to try to shame people out of one as there is to shame people into one.
@Andrea Francine,
Very well stated. Thank you.
I believe that sometimes you have to put your money where your mouth is. that’s what they are doing, right. They have the right to support whatever cause they choose and my only issue is that they say they are supporting “diversity” but they really are not because they are NOT diverse in the causes they support at all, they are not supporting anything I find diverse only pushing the pro gay agenda. Right? If they could have answered my email (yes, I emailed them) with ONE cause that was family friendly I would not have said goodbye to them. But you know what they cannot.
You know what I don’t have an issue with homosexuals: SIN IS SIN. I love people not the sin they are in. All of us have sin in our lives that we have to deal with. One sexual sin is no worse than another. That in itself freaks out many MANY of my Christian friends. I have many friends who are homosexuals. I have had them in my home for meals, I have talked to them at length about Christ and the church.
Your discretionary dollars are better spent at Chick-Fil-A, which has come under boycott pressure from the unbelieving world.
For those using the “Caesar” argument, the last time I checked there was no governmental purpose to Starbucks and no law that said I should pay taxes to them. The issue was not the corruption of the Roman world, but whether the chosen people of God (Israel/Judah) should pay taxes to a human government that operated outside the Mosaic Law. The government has a legitimate, universal function. Starbucks doesn’t; they are merely a business and have chosen to tie themselves (examine that phrase “Core Value”) to same-sex marriage as a valuable principle.
Should a person remain a member of a church which endorses intimate sexual contact outside of heterosexual marriage or openly approves of homosexuality or abortion or recreational drug use? If they leave, are they not “boycotting” that church by removing their gifts? Maybe they should remain in hopes of restoring that body to a right stance on the issue. Maybe “missionary dating” of unbelievers is a good thing, too.
No, Dr. Moore, I can’t agree. With the adoption of this principle as a Core Value of the company, they have crossed a line. Our dollars are better spent elsewhere. After all, shouldn’t our spending be a blessing to others?
@Bill Nettles,
I wonder whose empire you have given money to recently. What music is in your car stereo? What brand of toothpaste do you use? How can you be certain your dollars aren’t funding other sinful behavior?
Perhaps you could ‘dine with the tax collectors’ or have a cup of coffee with the local Starbucks barista-after all, someone humbled Himself enough to stoop down and help you.
@BCody- Perhaps you are forgetting that toothpaste, is a necessity, while coffee is not.
“The basic problem of the Christians in this country in the last eighty years or so, in regard to society and in regard to government, is that they have seen things in bits and pieces instead of totals. They have very gradually become disturbed over permissiveness, pornography, the public schools, the breakdown of the family, and finally abortion. But they have not seen this as a totality - each thing being a part, a symptom, of a much larger problem. They have failed to see that all of this has come about due to a shift in world view - that is, through a fundamental change in the overall way people think and view the world and life as a whole.” Francis Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto.
Schaeffer continues to observe that evangelical leadership has “not been much help” in combating the rampant secular world view that “leaves no room for meaning, purpose, or values in the universe.” Graciously standing against this world view is stance worth taking out of obedience, not out of probability of winning. This secularism is the air we breath, and the environment in which our children are being bread. Be weary, to not further ignore the symptoms and ignoring the problem by mistaking the part for the whole.
See also Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth.
If we boycott our barista, then to have a consistent ethic we must boycott any music that is not theologically wholesome…or maybe we should refuse to eat out after church since it is a day of worship and rest…Or maybe instead of formulating a list of boycotts we use our energies like Dr. Moore has suggested. And when we get tired, we go down to the local Starbucks, buy a coffee and engage the local barista with good conversation. God only knows how much the barista may need Christ.
Boycotting is a way for people to express their displeasure with, in this case, a large company that seems to disrespect their sincerely held beliefs. The people do not want their money going into the hands of a company that supports or endorses views contrary to their core beliefs.
I believe that prayer is way more powerful than boycotting will be. I hear so little about prayer from Christian churches, leaders, and believers.
We are to take up the weapons of our warfare, that Christ gave us, which are not carnal, but are mighty in God, and which pull down the strongholds of the devil. See 2 Corinthians 10:4.
Only when we partake of the spiritual weapons, will we truly see God move.
Or we might conclude that it is as simple as God does not like spending His money (all the money we manage) at a place that promotes something antithetical to his Word and nature and coffee is pretty good from our own home pots. I like Starbucks Coffee but believe Russell’s arguments above are political not biblically simple.
A family member recommended me to your site. Thanks
for the information.
After reading all of the comments related to this article, I am left aggravated, tired, and worried, but also uplifted and reassured. Basically just confused, which I think is something we Christians sometimes are experts at. First of all, for me, this article says nothing about whether or not you should spend your money at Starbucks if you feel lead not to. I don’t know the writer personally, but I’m confident that he would never suggest that you do anything when convicted by the Lord to do otherwise. We seem to be so quick to pick things apart that we miss the broader message just so we can get down to the part where we get to display our own righteousness and importance and personal value. He simply states why we shouldn’t boycott. Choosing not to spend our money doesn’t necessarily equal a boycott. A boycott is public and positioned, while your own convictions should be personal, that is, determined by your own relationship with the Father, not as a political tool. The overwhelming message to me in this article was how we as Christians are avoiding the real work, and clinging on to the public works just to feel ourselves vindicated for our humanity with a public position. The real work there was done on the cross, so what are we trying to prove? Our public position should be one of compassion, and generosity, love, and concern for others. It should be more about what we are for, and less about what we are against. If we were truly concerned about the sanctity of marriage, divorce wouldn’t be at 50% among Christians. If we were genuinely about compassion and concern for the eternal salvation of our fellow travellers, homosexuals would see Christians as friends instead of enemies. If we were concerned about homosexuals as people and not as their sin, we wouldn’t be nearly determining their eternal destination as Hell by bludgeoning them with cruelty and venom. They will know us by our love, not our judgement. They will know us by our love, not our boycotts, chants, and signs. We get so distracted by the trivial that we overlook the imperative. We must be better examples of Christ’s love. Then we can talk about where we buy our coffee, which is the message that I got from the article.
Jumping on bandwagons usually ends with falling off of bandwagons. It is hard to know what any organization believes because of the way the media and PR professionals spin things to win our hearts. Yes, some people at Starbucks may believe that gay marriage is something that should be fought for, however there may be many baristas out there who work at Starbucks because of the health benefits and are believers. Systems are huge, complicated and usually one person speaks for a bunch of individuals and when it is not a Christian system there won’t be a consensus on a religious belief system.
Recently, I stopped my children from eating at McDonald’s because I saw a link on a friend’s facebook posting that said chicken nuggets were made out of a pink slime and remotely resembled a chicken. Later, I found out along with everyone else that pink slime was a filler used by beef production companies. Now my children are happily eating chicken nuggets again and I feel guilty for believing something just because it was posted on the the internet.
Starbucks Execs may be proponents of gay marriage. However, Starbucks is also a very large employer that keeps people employed and provides health insurance. Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.
Thanks so much for your insights on this post - it really made me think!
While I understand Dr. Moore’s message on focusing on the condition of the sinner, as opposed to attacking the sin within, I also believe, as stewards of the Lord’s blessings (especially when a business has boldly stated its position that is in direct opposition to the teachings and commandments of the Lord) that we would be culpable to ignore how the blessing is utilized in the long run. Did not the Lord warn the Churches against toleration of those that teach wickedness as good? We need to be very careful that we do not confuse compassion with tolerance. They are not the same thing. I believe Romans 14 is a good rule of conduct for these times. There is no wrong in drinking a Starbucks, but are you comfortable with how the Lord’s money is being spent by the merchant who has boldly stated they support a behavior God condemns? If Starbucks hadn’t publicly taken a stand on same-sex marriage, there would not be a need for Christians to standfast in opposition of teaching/condoning/promoting/supporting wickedness as good. The Lord’s blessings shouldn’t be ignorantly cast before swine (Matt 7:6).
I think it is a matter between the individual and God - personally there are some companies that are just in your face about their particular beliefs - my response is to NOT spend my money with them. It is a choice I choose to make. In 1988 I stopped buying a product and have not missed it one bit.
Dr. Moore: Your response to Starbucks is obviously flawed as some of the first respondents noted. Most of the respondents (at least most of those I read) seem to be unwilling to give this company any support due to their support of the same sex marriage issue. Perhaps it would have been alright to go to the Coliseum in Rome or to the Race track (I forget its name) to watch the gladiatorial combats and the martyrdom of Christians in those days long ago. Perhaps it was alright to argue as some of our ancestors and predecessors did that slavery was biblical, to say, as Dr. Furman did, that Southern Baptists would fight in defence of slavery, but the frightful price of such evil (630,000= casualties alone) was enough to make us cry out what happened to those who opposed the evil before it brought on a blood bath. And look at the terrible cost of Abortion (50,000,000 dead babies in America alone). Now we have euthanasia in the offing, and we set back and do nothing. The only thing a corporation respects is its bottom line, its profits. The thing is now considered a person in our courts of law, a person guilty in many instances of murder of multitudes, and, nature abhors a vacuum, so it does a moral vacuum. Sooner or later, we will brought to the collapse of civilization with the attitude, that we might show ourselves in a bad light. Yeah, well just consider how bad our defence of slavery made us look. Why didn’t we have someone to study Newton and Wilberforce and others for the biblical answer that God does not support slavery as such, regardless of His making use of such. Ask an African American how they feel about our defence of slavery? Then ask them about not boycotting Starbucks over their support of same sex marriage? And why is it that the media does not report homosexual rapes and violence against people who want no part of that lifestyle. Consider how many of our grandchildren or great grands will wind up being manipulated by an educational system bent on teaching the acceptability of such practices. And we think our government is really a democracy and free?
Can we stop assuming that gay people aren’t Christians? The fact that someone has a different viewpoint does not mean you are correct and they need to be “saved”.
Also, to the boycotters - I hope you never see a movie or eat anywhere other than Chic-fil-a. Let’s not get started on where you can and can’t shop for clothes or household products. It’s sickening to see the gay community demonized and boycotted over all other things.
Genesis tells us that God made man and He made woman and told them to be fruitful and multiply.
If God had meant for two men to marry or two women to marry, there would not have been any multiplying and we would not even have this discussion because child bearing would never had occurred.
The term Christian was given to people in the New Testament days who followed the teachings of Jesus Christ. They were being called little Christs or Christians.
Since Jesus is in the Father, He does not go against what the Father has done. In fact, Jesus, the Word, was the One through whom all things were made. Jesus would not condoned anything other than a man and woman in marriage.
Therefore, Christians are followers of what Jesus taught.
Jesus makes a way for “all’ who believe and make Him Lord of their lives. II Cor. 5:17 says “if any man is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things are passed away;..
So, a “gay” person can be made new and enjoy an abundant life in Christ.
@Bruce Hill,
“Genesis tells us that God made man and He made woman and told them to be fruitful and multiply.
If God had meant for two men to marry or two women to marry, there would not have been any multiplying and we would not even have this discussion because child bearing would never had occurred.”
^Does this mean that anyone past the child-bearing age can’t get married? Does it mean that those who elect not to have children can’t get married? Does it mean that those who are unable to have children due to medical reasons can’t get married? In every other situation, the point of marriage is obviously not only to bear children.
“Jesus would not condoned anything other than a man and woman in marriage.”
^Really? You feel comfortable assuming what Jesus would and would not condone? I would like to see you produce even one verse where Jesus speaks against gay marriage.
“Therefore, Christians are followers of what Jesus taught.”
^See above.
Maybe you don’t agree, and to each his/her own (though I think you are making an unfortunate mistake), but the assumption that someone with different beliefs than you is in need of being “saved” or is definitely not a Christian is really narrow minded and presumptuous. You are only hurting yourself and your witness by assuming.
It would be interesting to how much money the Baptist have investing in Starbucks.
Good day: many thanks for using the time of composing up this information. I usually try to additionally my comprehension of things. No matter if I agree or disagree, I like specifics. I keep in mind the olden times if the only supply of data was the library or even the newspaper. They both equally feel so old. : )
Good premise, Dr. Moore. I’d wish you’d extend it to those who uncritically lust for war in the name of national security (eg conservation of the power of an empire).
Regards,
HMI
While I agree with the general premise of your article from a Christian worldview (we should be good witnesses of our faith, first and foremost - not be stuck in power plays), but from a purely political point of view, I shall quote the immortal Captain Jean-Luc Picard:
“I will not sacrifice the Enterprise. We’ve made too many compromises already; too many retreats. They invade our space and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here!”
I see no sense to continue to give money to organizations that hate everything we stand for. Sure, it’s impossible to boycott every last left-leaning company. But I’ll sleep better at night knowing that Star Bucks has one less cup of coffee to pour.
Sam
@Sam Guthrie,
Live long and prosper!