• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Adidas Bans Scientology

Dissolution said:
According to German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel, any football player sponsored by Adidas who joins Scientology will have his contract with them terminated.
It sits alongside similar clauses for drug convictions and joining organisations that are monitored by the intelligence services.
This particular example was noticed in an unspecified Bayern Munich player's contract.

Adidas have apparently claimed that it's a standard clause in their contracts and that Scientology is at odds with it's fundamental values of diversity and tolerance.

Is this a bit of a slippery slope or is it an acceptable stance?
Click to expand...

Since bible colleges make all employees sign a contract with an "I believe" clause, I don't see why Adidas couldn't have an "I don't believe" clause.
 
Belz... said:
Because you shouldn't discriminate based on beliefs. Christianity was probably a scam to start with, as well.
Click to expand...
Really? No discernment?

If Christianity or Islam had been nipped in the bud, would that have been worth it? Should we wrap other dangerous nonsense in a neat bundle, call it "Religion" and respect it? What if we can stop $cientology before it becomes yet another drain on resources?
 
The Don said:
Unless those beliefs bring the brand into disrepute. Adidas clearly feel that being associated with a sportsperson who is themselves associated with Scientology is detrimental to their brand. I could see the same happening if a sportsperson converts to (or publicises their) fundamentalist religious beliefs and makes some deeply disparaging comments about homosexuals, people of other religions or people from other racial groupings.
Click to expand...

Adidas prefers that those they sponsor would attribute their success to their* soles not their** souls.


*Adidas

**the athletes
 
Last edited:
Rasmus said:
The believers are probably sincere in either case, regardless of the motives of those at the top.
Click to expand...
In the case of $cientology, I'm not sure the "believers" are sincere. At least, not the bulk of them. Those inside are kept* there by fear and coercion. The "belief" seems like cognitive dissonance and suchlike.




* And high, electric, barbed fences. Physical ones too ;)
 
tsig said:
Since bible colleges make all employees sign a contract with an "I believe" clause, I don't see why Adidas couldn't have an "I don't believe" clause.
Click to expand...

Because a Bible college is a religious institution. Their raison d’être is the promotion of a particular set of beliefs. They cannot do that, if the people they hire are opposed to those beliefs.

adidas' raison d’être is selling shoes and t-shirts. They can easily do that with/to people that believe in Scientology or Christianity, since neither promotes a dogma against jogging.
 
Belz... said:
I disagree strongly with any religion but shouldn't people be free to believe whatever they want ?

There's more to this, I presume.
Click to expand...

No, a private organization should be allowed to decide which ideas they support and do not support.

They (the athletes) are free to believe whatever they want, but they are not free to associate with whomever they want and also be associated with Adidas.

Hats off to Adidas. I would equally solute them if they chose to add a line to the contract to disqualify holocaust deniers, or aids deniers, or homeopaths, some ideas SHOULD be scrutinized and held up as bad ideas unworthy of support.

Drawing a line in the sand and saying you are either with us or them is perfectly acceptable.
 
Last edited:
Dissolution said:
According to German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel, any football player sponsored by Adidas who joins Scientology will have his contract with them terminated.
It sits alongside similar clauses for drug convictions and joining organisations that are monitored by the intelligence services.This particular example was noticed in an unspecified Bayern Munich player's contract.

Adidas have apparently claimed that it's a standard clause in their contracts and that Scientology is at odds with it's fundamental values of diversity and tolerance.

Is this a bit of a slippery slope or is it an acceptable stance?
Click to expand...
FYI. The highlighted bit is a euphemism for extremist organizations. Domestic intelligence (Verfassungsschutz: literally Constitution Protection) monitors organizations that are opposed to the constitutional order and might seek to overthrow the government. That includes some scientology organizations.

From a legal point of view one must note that it's a sponsoring contract and not an employment contract. If it were the latter then any of those clauses would be void, including the one regarding drug convictions.
As it is, I think the clause might hold up even if it were regarding an officially recognized religion.

What constitutes a religion and thus religious discrimination is determined in Germany just like in the US: By the courts.
 
Belz... said:
Because you shouldn't discriminate based on beliefs. Christianity was probably a scam to start with, as well.
Click to expand...

Well, there are beliefs and beliefs.

Just to rewind for a moment, we're talking about a corporation choosing to sponsor a sportsperson in exchange for that person using their products and promoting their brand to its customers in what is hoped will be an appealing way.

Is there no belief that sportsperson could express which would give the corporation any justification for ceasing their sponsorship?
 
Belz... said:
Irrelevant.



Yes, because no one can discriminate against black people because they can't change colour. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Certainly black people can and have been discriminated against. So what? Are you arguing that people are born Scientologists and only realize it later?
 
Rasmus said:
I was not suggesting that belief could turn you black, but that "belief in the teachings of Scientology" might well qualify as a protected class.
Click to expand...

According to a Mormon Apostle it might turn you white:

Several Book of Mormon passages have been interpreted by some Latter Day Saints as indicating that Lamanites would revert to a lighter skin tone upon accepting the gospel. For example, at a 1960 LDS Church General Conference, apostle Spencer W. Kimball suggested that the skin of Latter-day Saint Native Americans was gradually turning lighter:

I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today... The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as Anglos, five were darker but equally delightsome. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation. At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter we represent, the little member girl—sixteen—sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parents—on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather... These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.[27]
 
> Is there no belief that sportsperson could express which would give the corporation any justification for ceasing their sponsorship?

I would not be surprised if a representative position gives the paying party more freedom of choice than other contracts would.

It is possible to have people fired for their beliefs. Recently, a chimney sweep has lost his licence/assignment due to his activity supporting right wing extremists. If I understand correctly, he took part in rallies or vigils honouring Organisation Consul.

Chimney sweeps have a right to enter private homes and check heating installations for saftey, etc. They can enforce that right. They are assigned to their districts by local authorities. The court rules, after multiple repeals, that residents could not be forced to let a known, open racist into their homes, especially considering that the residents might not be white themselves.

So, it *is* possible. But this guy was barred from his profession because of his individual actions, not just his professed beliefs. And his beliefs are not religious, and religious beliefs enjoy a much higher degree of protection.

the claim that Germany isn't recognizing Scientology as a religious is highly imprecise at best. Various courts have ruled that they are a religious community, and some federal states have discontinued their observation of the church. At best, the question has not been settled. The cynic in me thinks nobody will try to have the question settled, simply because there really isn't anything that could be brought up against Scientology that would not also apply to many of the more accepted religions.
 
GnaGnaMan said:
FYI. The highlighted bit is a euphemism for extremist organizations. Domestic intelligence (Verfassungsschutz: literally Constitution Protection) monitors organizations that are opposed to the constitutional order and might seek to overthrow the government. That includes some scientology organizations.

From a legal point of view one must note that it's a sponsoring contract and not an employment contract. If it were the latter then any of those clauses would be void, including the one regarding drug convictions.
As it is, I think the clause might hold up even if it were regarding an officially recognized religion.

What constitutes a religion and thus religious discrimination is determined in Germany just like in the US: By the courts.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I was just about to ask questions on that.

Yep, I am fine with the contract (at least in Germany).


ETA: although now I am wondering what would happen if the team were playing in a country where Scientology was a government-recognized religion and the guy met with Scientologists in that country.
 
Last edited:
In short, a company can sponsor who they choose to sponsor. They can choose to terminate the sponsorship of people who they consider bad for their company image, and there isn't a lot that anyone can do about it.

A number of Tiger Woods sponsorships and endorsements, including Tag Heuer, Accenture, Gillette, AT&T and Gatorade, were terminated due to revelations about his extra-marital affairs.

Zoopla have terminated their sponsorship of English football club West Bromwich Albion over the actions and political persuasions of striker, Nicolas Anelka.

It can work the other way too.

Last year, German Division Two football club, FSV Frankfurt terminated their sponsorship contract with Saudi Air because that airline refuses to allow Israelis to travel on its planes.
 
I suppose it is too much to assume that they are also refusing to sell their shoes to Scientoligists on the same high principle.
 
Oh yeah, I'm sure all that money goes to widows and orphans.
 
Dissolution said:
Would this still work?
Click to expand...

Depends what you mean by 'Christianity' really. For example, Adidas may be supportive of a Christian humanitarian group like World Vision (as an example off the top of my head, I don't actualy know if Adidas support Word Vision or not) while being totaly opposed to a Christian hate group such as the Westboro Baptist Church.

The term 'Christianity' covers a very wide range of different denominations and groups with very different beliefs and methods of operation.

Scientology on the other hand hasn't being going long enough to develop into such diversity.
 
If you read Going Clear by Lawrence Wright, he does a good job describing the contrast between Miscavige's lifestyle and that of the average Sea Org member.

Excerpt.
 
There is a difference here between employment and sponsorship. I don't think that these athletes qualify as employees. I may be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom