It’s a ridiculous idea on multiple levels. I feel sorry for the staff who, regardless of their stance on the issue, will likely feel embarrassed when telling the customer that they cannot have two of the same flavour, and then possibly face abuse from someone who only likes one flavour; a homophobe; or, Zeus forbid, a homophobe who only likes one flavour.

--

Josephus,

You’ve lost the plot. What does the physical difference between boys and girls, or the emotional state of children, have to do with anything?

For those questioning public opinion, the polling has shown it to be consistently in favour of same-sex marriage since 2004. The number of those in favour of marriage equality is still rising, too.

http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality

Anyone who could honestly doubt that a majority are in favour of marriage equality need to get out a bit more.

The main reason for rejecting a plebiscite was discussed extensively and in multiple forums (including this online one), I’m sorry some appear to have missed it.

That is an unusual stand for a business company to
take. Good for them. I'm not sure how effective it
will be though. Still the publicity is probably worth
it for the company.

What may achieve better results however -
is their having boxes
in all 26 of their Australian stores where customers
can grab a postcard and write to their Members of Parliament
asking them to support marriage equality. Now that move
might have more success.

Previous form,

"Members of a Vermont activist group called Migrant Justice protested at Ben & Jerry's stores on Tuesday while the ice cream vendors were giving away free cones. The activists complained that the famously liberal company had yet to fulfill a pledge to use milk only from dairy farms that pay workers fair wages.

The company signed an agreement to do so as part of the group's "milk with dignity" campaign in 2015. However, Ben & Jerry's, which is part of Unilever, has yet to make changes to its supply chain, Migrant Justice says. Protesters from the group tried to use Tuesday's giveaway to bring attention to their cause.

Ben & Jerry's spokesman Rob Michalak conceded they the company made the agreement but told the Huffington Post that they still needed to "work through final details" of how to implement it, indicating that it was proving much harder to do than anticipated."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/migrant-worker-group-protests-ben-jerrys/article/2619337

Foxy:

"Still the publicity is probably worth it for the company"

Now same sex couples are being used by businesses to get publicity for themselves. With 70 per cent of customers probably being in favour of same-sex marriage it makes sense to appeal to that 70 per cent if you want to make money.

Who knows whether they are truly in favour of same-sex marriage or whether it is just a marketing ploy?

Same-sex couples should have more dignity than to let themselves be used for commercial gain. They should distance themselves from any actions which could be mis-interpreted. They should not appear to be selling themselves off to business.

Same-sex marriage arguments should rise or fall on their own merits and people who support such businesses because of their recorded stance on same-sex marriage should be ashamed of themselves. They should support same-sex marriage because they agree with the arguments presented. Anything else looks like your support is based on gimickry.

If you want, support groups who have nothing to gain from their actions other than same-sex marriage.

This company surely has the right to promote homosexual marriage in this way, it's their right as part of our freedom of expression.

[Oops, I used the word 'homosexual', so you know what's coming :) ]

On the same logic, wedding-cake makers have the same right to refuse to make a cake for homosexuals.

We may not approve of one or the other actions, but both equally are legal expressions of free speech. Perhaps someone can explain where my logic has gone dreadfully wrong ?

Joe