The most effective way to move a voter on any human rights issue is just that: face-to-face, not only by being living, breathing examples of the LGBT community, as many of our activists are, but by holding voters' thoughts and feelings about an issue accountable, which does not happen when someone is alone in the voting booth.  CFAC occupies public spaces where large amounts of supportive voters and non-supportive voters can be found to have these important discussions.  Just by having educational conversations with non-supportive voters, we are able to move 22-36% back to the side of equality.

CFAC understands that if we ever expect to move any non-supportive voters over to the side of equality, we must be kind, compassionate, and leave conversations on a good note so that the person will remain open to having that type of discussion in the future. What do we say when someone says no, they don’t support marriage equality?  We ask them, “Do you mind talking about why you don’t for just a moment?”  If the person says no or just ignores us, we say, “Have a good day.”  If someone is supportive but they don’t want to donate to the cause, the response is the same: “Well, maybe next time. Have a wonderful day.”  

We don’t specifically target Target stores to canvass outside of, we stand outside of other public forums as well where we will find a wide variety of voters to speak with. However, on March 7th of 2011, Canvass for a Cause was served, becoming a “target” for a lawsuit from Target retail stores.  Target filed an injunction to remove CFAC activists from talking with voters in front of their stores.  Their given reason was that CFAC staffers were “harassing” and upsetting customers with a topic that interfered with a customer's desire for a hassle-free shopping experience.

Target store managers were accusing our activists of getting angry and aggressive when people either didn’t want to donate or expressed the opinion that they did not agree on issues of gay rights.  One Target manager at a Poway location claimed that, “Whenever our customers say no, whether it is about making a donation, signing a petition, or about support for gay marriage, the solicitors become angry and aggressive, continuing to challenge our customers on their morals. I have seen them tell our customers not to vote if [the solicitors] are unhappy with the customers’ views.”  He also added, “Our store receives, on average, eight to ten complaints per day about Canvass for a Cause.”

The assertions were false; CFAC canvassers do not become aggressive or follow shoppers to their cars.   “It’s hyperbole to say our volunteers get agitated,” said Canvass for a Cause Executive Director Tres Watson. “Do we challenge their beliefs when they say they oppose gay marriage? Sure. But 90 percent of the time people tell us, ‘I don’t want to talk about it,’ and we say OK.”  Watson also said, "Target is alleging that our people are angry, militant, homosexual activists. But if you think through it logically, there's nothing [that] supports our cause [by] acting that way, and we don't.”

The first hearing on the case was March 8th, 2011 when CFAC beat the restraining order Target tried to put on CFAC activist’s right to free speech.  In April 2011, Judge Barton, in his preliminary injunction, ruled that CFAC canvassers were free to continue to canvass in front of Target stores.

At every step of the way, CFAC has fought and won the right to speak about important human rights issues, and we will continue to do so until we receive a permanent injunction from the courts.

Media Mentions of the Lawsuit