By Sami Elmansoury (Contact) 
 
 To be delivered to: Kristen Kurtz, Media Relations Contact, SWEET'N LOW, William P. Lauder, CEO, CLINIQUE, William J. Gentner, CEO, JOHN FRIEDA HAIRCARE WORLDWIDE, Michael Duke, CEO, WAL-MART, K-MART and 26 other targets (click here to see more) Kristen Kurtz, Media Relations Contact, SWEET'N LOW, William P. Lauder, CEO, CLINIQUE, William J. Gentner, CEO, JOHN FRIEDA HAIRCARE WORLDWIDE, Michael Duke, CEO, WAL-MART, K-MART, Robert F. Moran, CEO, PETSMART, James Dyson, CEO, DYSON VACUUMS, Steven C. Lieberman, VP & Managing Director, AMWAY, Carl Schlicker, CEO, STOP & SHOP, Jamie Dimon, CEO, JPMORGAN CHASE, Robert Dotson, CEO, T-MOBILE, HTC RADAR PHONE, CENTRUM, Frank Blake, CEO, HOME DEPOT, J. Clifford Hudson, CEO, SONIC, Glenn A. Britt, CEO, TIME WARNER CABLE, Adam Miller, Executive VP, Corporate Affairs, NBC NEWS, Lauren Knapp, Senior Vice President, NBC News Marketing & Communicaitons, NBC NEWS, PRO-ACTIV, AIRBORNE SUPPLEMENTS, THE LION KING, KETTLE CHIPS, TRUE BLUE TEST, KAYAK.COM, KAHLUA, TRUMOO, KINECT, Edmond J. English, CEO, BOB'S FURNITURE, FREE COUNTRY CLOTHING, NORTH SHORE/LIJ HOSPITAL, and Melissa Danforth, Senior Director, Communications and Membership, LEAPFROG 
 
 Petition Statement 
 
 We the undersigned, as concerned Americans and as your consumers, call for your continued advertising support during TLC's unscripted series, "All-American Muslim." 
 
 
 
 While no television program can possibly fully represent an entire community, the portrayal of five American families in Dearborn, Michigan has deeply positive repercussions and results—reinforcing shared values of family, friendship, community, and coexistence that are universal to all of us—whether we are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist, or of any other belief system represented in the United States. 
 
 
 
 We ask that you work to stand up against the bigots of the anti-Islam/Islamophobia industry, whose most concerning complaint is that the show is intent on humanizing American Muslims—as though humanization were not an American value. 
 
 
 
 These bigoted viewpoints reek of self-interest, do not represent the American mainstream, and do not speak for any political party. 
 
 
 
 The visible aim of those who have threatened the show's supporters is to propagate hatred against fellow Americans because of their religious beliefs, while increasing the success of their own bigoted industries. Ultimately, it is these same critics who have often touted the question: "Where are the mainstream Muslims?" We believe that "All-American Muslim" portrays just that—mainstream American Muslims—and that these critics should celebrate an effort like this, not condemn it. Yet their reactions leave no more proof necessary of their actual, hate-mongering intentions. And we believe that America and our American companies are above that. 
 
 
 
 To date, Lowe's has been the only company that has allegedly caved in to bigoted pressure, going on record to state that it would not continue to advertise during "All-American Muslim" because the TV show "did not meet its advertiser guidelines. [Lowe's] will pull [its] advertising on shows if [it] learn[s] there are issues raised from a broad spectrum of customers and viewers who represent multiple perspectives, which Lowe's understands was the case in this situation with this particular show." As yet, it is unclear as to which "multiple perspectives" were represented in the complaints, and such information has not been made available to the public eye. This raises grave concerns about the integrity behind the decision. 
 
 
 
 Lowe's Chairman Robert A. Niblock recently pointed out that "while leadership is always important, it's even more critical in challenging times." He was right. We ask that you show true leadership by ensuring that you do not cave in to support for this bigotry, and by letting the public know that your company will not bow to the demands of any bigoted interests, but will instead defend our cherished American values of pluralism, respect, a prevention of discrimination based on race and religion, and an openness to learn about the other without the flawed industries of fear, hatred, and intimidation reigning over us as a society. 
 
 
 
 As concerned Americans and as your consumers, we request that you stand up for our American values, and fight back against bigotry and fear-mongering, by publicly repudiating calls to stop advertising during TLC's "All-American Muslim." ||||| This weekend's Zach Galifianakis-helmed "Saturday Night Live" saw another "Fox & Friends" cold open, this time spoofing the conservative morning show's reaction to NBA-player Jason Collins coming out. 
 
 Hosts Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson & Brian Kilmeade (Taran Killam, Vanessa Bayer & Bobby Moynihan respectively) explained that we need to stop calling Collins a hero simply for revealing an "embarrassing secret." They then, of course, revealed their own secrets that don't make them heroes. 
 
 The segment went on to an interview with NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg (Fred Armisen) and wrapped up, as ever, with a riotous list of corrections. Watch the segment above and then see all of this week's corrections below. 
 
 This Week's "Fox & Friends" corrections, courtesy of SNL's tumblr: 
 
 Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs. 
 
 Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name. 
 
 The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco de Mayo. 
 
 President Obama does not want to take away T-shirt guns. 
 
 Most women have only two breasts. 
 
 The Memphis Grizzlies are not a gay blues band. 
 
 Scientology was not founded by I Ron Man. 
 
 Bangladesh is not an 80s metal band. 
 
 Peeking at ladies’ butts is not a background check. 
 
 Actual crows do have feet. 
 
 Pot pie is legal in every state. 
 
 The California wildfires are not a soccer team. 
 
 Jason Collins was not turned gay by a Washington Wizard. 
 
 The NRA is not a branch of government. 
 
 Foreign visas do not let Russian students go on shopping sprees. 
 
 Rick Moranis was never put on death row for shrinking his children. 
 
 New York exists outside the mind of Billy Joel. 
 
 A French press is not lifting weights with your tongue out. 
 
 Lena Dunham is not a girl ventriloquist. 
 
 Number 2 pencils are not sad that they lost. 
 
 Plan B birth control is not masturbating. 
 
 Justin Bieber and Anne Frank were not an item. 
 
 President Obama did not just wake up in Mexico. 
 
 F.A.A. does not stand for “Fart A**, A**” 
 
 Croquettes are not female crocodiles. 
 
 Kanye West is not an African American vacation destination. 
 
 Syria is not Arabic for “serious.” 
 
 Rice and beans are edible. Ricin beans are not. 
 
 Casual Friday is not in the Bill of Rights. 
 
 Sam Adams was not too drunk to sign the Constitution. 
 
 The Gitmo prisoners are not working on their bodies. 
 
 Force feeding is not how Jedi’s eat. 
 
 Kevin Costner does not live in Watertown. 
 
 Smurfs are not elected. 
 
 Smurfs are not appointed. 
 
 Smurfs are cartoons. 
 
 Aretha Franklin and Patti Labelle have been in the same room together. 
 
 Anytime minutes don’t let you call the future. 
 
 4 and 3 are not basically the same thing. 
 
 Rock beats scissors. 
 
 Zach Braff is not the sound a trumpet makes. 
 
 Also on HuffPost: ||||| The Supreme Court on Monday ruled for a Colorado baker who refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, but it left undecided whether a business owner’s religious beliefs or free speech rights can justify refusing some services to gay people. 
 
 Instead, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s 7-to-2 decision focused on what he described as religious bias on the part of Colorado Civil Rights Commission members who ruled against baker Jack Phillips, who owns Masterpiece Cakeshop. 
 
 “The neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised here,” Kennedy wrote, adding that the commission’s decision that the baker violated the state’s anti-discrimination law must be set aside. 
 
 But Kennedy acknowledged that the decision was more of a start than a conclusion to the court’s consideration of the rights of those with religious objections to same-sex marriage and the rights of gay people, who “cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth.” 
 
 Future cases that raise those issues “must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market,” he wrote. 
 
 [The spurned couple, the baker and the long wait for the Supreme Court] 
 
 Such a case could come quickly: The court is set to consider this week whether to review a Washington state Supreme Court decision that a florist could not legally decline to provide flowers to a same-sex wedding there. 
 
 The bakery case was one of two decisions Monday — a ruling on an immigrant teenager’s abortion was the other — in which the court opted for compromise rather than division. The justices are in the final month of a term that has included contentious fights over President Trump’s power in the travel ban case and what could be a landmark decision on partisan gerrymandering, among other issues. 
 
 Kennedy’s narrow ruling drew the support of three of the court’s consistent conservatives — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch — and two of its consistent liberals, Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan. 
 
 Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome but said he would have ruled for Phillips on free-speech grounds. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, saying comments from the commissioners did not change the outcome of the case. 
 
 “What prejudice infected the determinations of the adjudicators in the case before and after the Commission? The Court does not say,” Ginsburg wrote. 
 
 In a conference call with reporters, Phillips thanked the court for recognizing “the injustice that the government inflicted on me.” He said that “tolerance is a two-way street” and added, “If we want to have freedom for ourselves, we have to extend it to others with whom we disagree about important issues like the meaning of marriage.” 
 
 But James Esseks of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represented the couple at the center of the fight, Charlie Craig and David Mullins, pointed to Kennedy’s protective language about gay citizens and the “general rule” that religious and other objections “do not allow business owners and other actors in the economy and in society to deny . . . equal access to goods and services.” 
 
 “The bakery may have won the battle, but it has lost the war,” Esseks said in a conference call with reporters. 
 
 Even the dissenting Ginsburg began her opinion: “There is much in the Court’s opinion with which I agree.” 
 
 The case presented Kennedy with a dilemma. On the one hand, he is one of the court’s staunchest defenders of free speech and religious freedom. On the other, he has written all of the court’s groundbreaking opinions on gay rights, including that there is a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry. 
 
 He had signaled in oral arguments that comments from members of the commission displaying “religious hostility” might be the narrow way out. 
 
 “At several points during its meeting, commissioners endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, implying that religious beliefs and persons are less than fully welcome in Colorado’s business community,” Kennedy wrote. 
 
 He noted that one commissioner later said that religious beliefs had been “used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the holocaust.” 
 
 Such statements, Kennedy wrote, “cast doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the Commission’s adjudication of Phillips’ case.” 
 
 Phillips contended that dual guarantees in the First Amendment — free speech and the free exercise of religion — protect him against Colorado’s public accommodations law, which requires businesses to serve customers equally regardless of “disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.” 
 
 Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Kristen Waggoner, who represented Phillips, praised the ruling. “Government hostility toward people of faith has no place in our society, yet the state of Colorado was openly antagonistic toward Jack’s religious beliefs about marriage,” she said. 
 
 She and Esseks agreed that the court’s decision resolves this particular case against Phillips. But she was reluctant to opine on what might happen if Phillips again declined to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, saying she needed more time to study the ruling. 
 
 Across the country, florists, bakers, photographers and others have claimed that being forced to offer their wedding services to same-sex couples violates their rights. Courts have routinely turned down the business owners, as the Colorado Court of Appeals did in the Phillips case, saying state anti-discrimination laws require businesses that are open to the public to treat all potential customers equally. 
 
 There’s no dispute about what triggered the court case in 2012, when same-sex marriage was prohibited in Colorado. Craig and Mullins decided to get married in Massachusetts, where it was legal. They would return to Denver for a reception, and those helping with the plans suggested they get a cake from Masterpiece Cakeshop. 
 
 The couple arrived with Craig’s mother and a book of ideas, but Phillips cut short the meeting as soon as he learned that the cake was to celebrate the couple’s marriage. 
 
 Phillips recalled: “Our conversation was just about 20 seconds long. ‘Sorry guys, I don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.’ ” 
 
 The couple then learned that Colorado’s public accommodations law specifically prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, and they filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The commission ruled against Phillips, and the appeals court upheld the decision. 
 
 On Monday, Craig and Mullins issued a statement on the ruling: “Today’s decision means our fight against discrimination and unfair treatment will continue,” the couple said. “We have always believed that in America, you should not be turned away from a business open to the public because of who you are. We brought this case because no one should have to face the shame, embarrassment, and humiliation of being told ‘we don’t serve your kind here’ that we faced, and we will continue fighting until no one does.” 
 
 Within the court’s seven-member majority, there were differences that are likely to animate future cases. 
 
 Gorsuch, along with Alito, indicated they would have been willing to go further. Some may find Phillips’s religious beliefs irrational or even offensive, Gorsuch wrote, but that is of no consequence. “In this country, the place of secular officials isn’t to sit in judgment of religious beliefs, but only to protect their free exercise,” he wrote. 
 
 He added: “It is no more appropriate for the United States Supreme Court to tell Mr. Phillips that a wedding cake is just like any other — without regard to the religious significance his faith may attach to it — than it would be for the Court to suggest that for all persons sacramental bread is just bread or a kippah is just a cap.” 
 
 Kagan, joined by Breyer, said Gorsuch was wrong. 
 
 “A wedding cake does not become something different whenever a vendor like Phillips invests its sale to particular customers with ‘religious significance,’ ” Kagan wrote. “As this Court has long held, and reaffirms today, a vendor cannot escape a public accommodations law because his religion disapproves selling a product to a group of customers, whether defined by sexual orientation, race, sex, or other protected trait.” 
 
 She referenced a 1968 decision that said a barbecue restaurant owner must serve black customers even though he claimed that his religion did not embrace racial equality. 
 
 Monday’s case is Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. ||||| PLEASANTON, Calif. (CN) — A gag gift that a black employee did not find funny has landed a Bay Area construction company owner in court, for giving her a photo of himself dressed as Donald Trump in front of a Confederate flag, inside a rhinestone purse also emblazoned with the Stars and Bars. 
 
 Tishay Wright sued Southland Construction Management and its supervisors and co-owners Kenneth and Anita Hayden on Thursday in Alameda County Court, on 12 causes of action, including racial discrimination and harassment, retaliation, assault and battery and wrongful firing. 
 
 Wright, a project administrator at the Pleasanton business, says that Kenneth Hayden retaliated for her objecting to his calling her a “bitch�? by giving her a rhinestone purse at the company Christmas party, emblazoned with the Confederate flag. 
 
 Inside the purse, she says, were photographs of Kenneth Hayden dressed as Trump, and his wife as a Trump supporter, both posing in front of Confederate flags hung above Wright’s desk. The slogans “The Southland Shall Rise Again�? and “Make Southland Great Again�? were written on the flags in capital letters. 
 
 In one photograph, the gift purse hung from Anita Hayden’s shoulder. 
 
 Wright “returned home in tears after opening the gift, horrified, humiliated and deeply fearful that the owners of Southland would go to these lengths to silence and intimidate her after her multiple complaints to management,�? she says in the complaint. Her “shock and horror over the purse and pictures depicting racist symbolism and a hostile potential violent message caused her to become increasingly nauseous and anxiety-ridden.�? 
 
 Southland could not be reached for comment after business hours Thursday. 
 
 Wright, who began working for Southland in 2015, says the Haydens used racist language openly and regularly around their employees, with “we’ll just make the Mexicans do it�? a common refrain. When the Haydens were unhappy with their work, they would say Mexicans are lazy and would work for beer, according to the complaint. 
 
 Wright says Kenneth Hayden told a Sikh intern to “go get your people before they blow something up.�? 
 
 Wright says the Haydens gave her the purse as payback after she complained to management that Kenneth Hayden had called her and another female employee into his office and told them: “Ya’ll are my bitches and you’re going to take notes for the smaller projects coming up.�? 
 
 When she objected to the language, she says, Kenneth Hayden told her: “This is the way I talk and if you don’t like it and can’t work with me then you don’t have to.�? 
 
 The Haydens then reduced her job responsibilities, taking her off a large project and effectively demoting her to a receptionist, she says. They fired her in March, she says, after she told Anita Hayden it was unacceptable to give a black employee the gifts they had given her. 
 
 She seeks damages and punitive damages, for charges that include racial and gender harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. 
 
 She is represented by Christopher Dolan in San Francisco, who could not be reached for comment after hours Thursday. 
 
 Like this: Like Loading...
– The biggest apology of the week came from Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, but it was hardly the only one to make headlines: Shamed: “I apologize from my heart to those who have died or been injured. I feel a heavy responsibility.”—Shigehisa Takada, chief executive of the Japanese supplier Takata, over his company's air bag issues. Unsportsmanlike: "I got carried away responding to playful ribbing ... and, in my stupidity, overcompensated by saying something ignorant and extreme. 100% mistake on my part, for which I'm deeply sorry."—Andy Benoit of Sports Illustrated, after tweetiing that women's sports weren't worth watching. He then got skewered by Seth Meyers and Amy Poehler. Flag gaffe: “Our local store made a mistake. The cake in the video should not have been made and we apologize.”—Walmart spokesperson, after a store in Louisiana made a cake adorned with an ISIS flag, ordered by someone trying to make a point about the chain's ban on the Confederate flag. Civil discourse: "But for those of you who were offended by what was intended as a very genuine attempt at fostering a civil discussion, I apologize."—John Micek, opinion editor at PennLive, after announcing a decision to "strictly limit" letters in opposition to same-sex marriage in the week of this week's Supreme Court ruling. The site is affiliated with the Patriot News of Harrisburg, Pa. Celebrity interference: “I sincerely regret not discussing my editing rationale with our partners at PBS and WNET, and I apologize for putting PBS and its member stations in the position of having to defend the integrity of their programming."—Henry Louis Gates Jr., after PBS said it would postpone his Finding Your Roots series because of its Ben Affleck miscue.