With the release of one organization's annual rating of U.S. workplaces on LGBT equality, one commentator questions why companies have been changing their policies.
Human Rights Campaign considers the Human Rights Campaign Foundation's 2016 Corporate Equality Index (CEI) to be the national benchmarking tool on corporate policies and practices pertinent to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender employees.
In the 2016 CEI report, 407 major businesses -- spanning nearly every industry and geography -- earned a top score of 100 percent and the distinction of "Best Places to Work for LGBT Equality."
"They've certainly made impressive gains in the commitment of corporate America to their agenda," admits Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council (FRC).
"I'm not sure that all of these policies have been adopted because these companies think that it helps to operate their businesses better," he continues. "I think it's more of a matter of bowing to political correctness and, in some cases, actually wanting to avoid the threat of being accused of bigotry. So, I question the sincerity of some of these policies."
Sprigg thinks it would be "reasonable" for corporates to take a neutral approach to these issues.
"If they want to hire homosexuals and transgender employees, that is certainly their business," he recognizes. "But when you get to the point of trying to impose that sort of policy on others, on the country through our legal system, or even on suppliers and contractors and so forth, then I think it's gone too far. I think we should stick with the free market and let the free market operate."
FRC’s policy studies senior fellow adds that as people pray about these matters, it is also important for them to speak out.
"There have been times when conservatives have been successful in making their voice heard, but unfortunately, they seem to be sporadic, whereas groups like Human Rights Campaign are at this constantly; continually they put their pressure on without ever letting up," Sprigg concludes.