Official Chick-fil-A Thread

[realisticidealist]

I think boycotting a company that donates millions to organisations that funds 'ex-gay' shams is a sensible thing to do if you have 21st Century sensibilities.

A boycott against a corporation as large as Chick-fil-A has never been successful and certainly won't start now. It's about as effectual as spreading that Kony video. If it makes you feel good about yourself, whatever, but that's about all it would do.

[rwoy]

I'm sorry but how exactly is this a "debate".  I think it is pretty simple.  Chick-fil-A's owner is perfectly within his rights to express his opinion and donate to whatever he wants to donate to.  Similarly, people who disagree with him are perfectly within their rights to inform others of his opinion and to discourage them from eating at his restaurants.  Similarly, the KKK has the right to express their opinions, to start up a restaurant chain, and to have people protest them.

[opebo]

Corporations support things you don't agree with all the time; it's like people have different beliefs or something. If you actually boycotted every company who did something you didn't like, you'd have to make everything yourself.

This is another good argument against capitalism - instead of having society controlled by these unaccountable baronies, why not have those functions performed by the State, accountable at the ballot box, etc.

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

I had no idea what a Chick-fil-a was until this outrage started.

[Senator Ben]

I had no idea what a Chick-fil-a was until this outrage started.

Really?  I guess it's more of a Southern thing.

[muon2]

I think boycotting a company that donates millions to organisations that funds 'ex-gay' shams is a sensible thing to do if you have 21st Century sensibilities.

This is sensible, but what Chicago is doing is quite different. If a person has an offensive position and another person disagrees a boycott is an acceptable means of protest against their organization. If a person has an offensive position and government official chooses to discriminate against their organization on a neutral matter like zoning or subdivision that is not an acceptable form of protest.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I had no idea what a Chick-fil-a was until this outrage started.

As noted in the articles about it tends to be more of a "red state" (incorrect color of course, blue by the correct Atlas color scheme) thing, the only one I've ever seen is the one at my old university's food court. The only two in the Twin Cities appear to be in food courts at the University of Minnesota and the airport, so yeah outside the south they just seem to appear in food courts. I did eat at it at my university because at the time I wasn't aware of who owned it and what they supported, but their nuggets have this really weird aftertaste and the food in general has a way of making you feel gross afterwards. Probably better to avoid it anyway.

I think boycotting a company that donates millions to organisations that funds 'ex-gay' shams is a sensible thing to do if you have 21st Century sensibilities.

This is sensible, but what Chicago is doing is quite different. If a person has an offensive position and another person disagrees a boycott is an acceptable means of protest against their organization. If a person has an offensive position and government official chooses to discriminate against their organization on a neutral matter like zoning or subdivision that is not an acceptable form of protest.

That's kind of how I feel, I mean what if some mayor in the south screaming about "defending traditional marriage" decided to try to block the opening of an Apple Store because of Apple's position on this? The mayor publicizing the company's CEO's position and fundings and calling for a boycott is also an effective way of shaming and hurting the company. Trying to block them from opening then lets them play the victim card and drum up sympathy. This is now doubt winning Chik-fil-a far more business in the south that would equal far more money than just a new location in Boston and Chicago would.

[opebo]

I think boycotting a company that donates millions to organisations that funds 'ex-gay' shams is a sensible thing to do if you have 21st Century sensibilities.

This is sensible, but what Chicago is doing is quite different. If a person has an offensive position and another person disagrees a boycott is an acceptable means of protest against their organization. If a person has an offensive position and government official chooses to discriminate against their organization on a neutral matter like zoning or subdivision that is not an acceptable form of protest.

Dude, its not 'protest', it is the democratic process.  The people, through their elected representatives, don't want him to sell his chicken in their community.  This is precisely the converse of the fashion by which the rich have a voice (through their money, paying for media), while the poor are silenced.  Here, the Commons act to counter the overweaning power of a money-elite.

[Vasall des Midas]

If I boycotted every business where I disagreed with the political views of those in charge, I might have to kill for my own food.

I really don't care what businesses think, short of "Hey, let's overthrow the republic."

Sorry, that rabbit you're aiming at has political views you disagree with (specifically on hungry humans' gun rights). You will have to boycott it.

[Torie]

The franchise should be opened, and I should boycott it. KISS.

[rwoy]

Fact: college students are morons.

Just saw this and I've gotta comment.  College students are like people on the internet ... they think they know more than they really do but odds are they are better informed than others.

[rwoy]

Similar to the "Chick-fil-A" story, here's one about a Mississippi church exercising their first amendment rights to be racist ...

http://news.yahoo.com/mississppi-church-refuses-marry-black-couple-205218322--abc-news-topstories.html

[Yelnoc]

Relevant Personal Anecdote:

Today at Sunday school my regular teacher as MIA, so we got lumped into a group with sophomores.  And lo and behold, one of the men who teach the class is a corporate employee at Chick-fil-A.  The topic was 'leadership' but he got off on a tangent about his job and mentioned the Chick-fil--A president, whose name escapes me.  He said "that interview which stirred up so much controversy, was given by [The President] on his back porch after mowing the lawn to a baptist organization.  He didn't have his Monday-Friday business mentality on when he said those things, you know, he was just speaking for himself.  But then the AJC and then national media latched onto the story and..." and then he went on and on about how the President is "strong in his walk withe The Lord."  Some pipsqueak behind me said "The bible says Homosexuality is an abomination, you know" and I just buried my head in my hands.  God, how I hate the Baptist Church.

[ChairmanSanchez]

God, how I hate the Baptist Church.

Baptists have been corrupted like the Tea Party...Baptists once believed in religious freedom. They once believed in more than tolerance-they believed in full blown love and acceptance. They once believed that every person is made in God's image, and thus, homosexuality is perfectly fine.

I went back to Church today, for the first time in a few months, and was actually invited to join (despite that fact that I don't even live in the same county) and I must say, all opposition to gay marriage I had just yesterday was and is wrong. The point that won me over:

Every person is made in God's image, and thus, homosexuality is perfectly fine.

I wish other Christian churches would take up the old Baptist beliefs that are still practiced at my church. This still does not change my opinion on the Chick-fil-A debacle, of course. I still think they have a right to their opinion, just as I have mine (which is now the opposite of theirs), and that the outrage is uncalled for.

[So the Heroes Fall]

SOUTHERN Baptists are the problem. Lots of other Baptists are liberal.

[afleitch]

I went back to Church today, for the first time in a few months, and was actually invited to join (despite that fact that I don't even live in the same county) and I must say, all opposition to gay marriage I had just yesterday was and is wrong. The point that won me over:

Every person is made in God's image, and thus, homosexuality is perfectly fine.

[Governor Scott]

God, how I hate the Baptist Church.

Baptists have been corrupted like the Tea Party...Baptists once believed in religious freedom. They once believed in more than tolerance-they believed in full blown love and acceptance. They once believed that every person is made in God's image, and thus, homosexuality is perfectly fine.

I went back to Church today, for the first time in a few months, and was actually invited to join (despite that fact that I don't even live in the same county) and I must say, all opposition to gay marriage I had just yesterday was and is wrong. The point that won me over:

Every person is made in God's image, and thus, homosexuality is perfectly fine.

I wish other Christian churches would take up the old Baptist beliefs that are still practiced at my church. This still does not change my opinion on the Chick-fil-A debacle, of course. I still think they have a right to their opinion, just as I have mine (which is now the opposite of theirs), and that the outrage is uncalled for.

[So the Heroes Fall]

BTW since Yelnoc has been fairly defensive of Catholicism in the past (inexplicably, since he obviously isn't Catholic), he might want to familiarize himself with this guy: http://www.citypages.com/2012-06-20/news/archbishop-john-nienstedt-crusades-against-gay-marriage

He's probably even worse than the Chik-fil-A president.

Oh, and congratulations Sanchez!

[True Federalist]

I think boycotting a company that donates millions to organisations that funds 'ex-gay' shams is a sensible thing to do if you have 21st Century sensibilities.

This is sensible, but what Chicago is doing is quite different. If a person has an offensive position and another person disagrees a boycott is an acceptable means of protest against their organization. If a person has an offensive position and government official chooses to discriminate against their organization on a neutral matter like zoning or subdivision that is not an acceptable form of protest.

Dude, its not 'protest', it is the democratic process.  The people, through their elected representatives, don't want him to sell his chicken in their community.  This is precisely the converse of the fashion by which the rich have a voice (through their money, paying for media), while the poor are silenced.  Here, the Commons act to counter the overweaning power of a money-elite.

One thing I like about you opebo is you don't even bother with consistency.  After all, I presume you don't intend to stop complaining about your worries that the Thai people, through their elected representatives, will decide they no longer want to sell their girls in their communities.

[Yelnoc]

BTW since Yelnoc has been fairly defensive of Catholicism in the past (inexplicably, since he obviously isn't Catholic), he might want to familiarize himself with this guy: http://www.citypages.com/2012-06-20/news/archbishop-john-nienstedt-crusades-against-gay-marriage

He's probably even worse than the Chik-fil-A president.

Oh, and congratulations Sanchez!

You hate "Papists" and thus, Catholics are obvious FF

[muon2]

Mayor Emanuel does a partial backtrack.

[Senator MaxQue]

BTW since Yelnoc has been fairly defensive of Catholicism in the past (inexplicably, since he obviously isn't Catholic), he might want to familiarize himself with this guy: http://www.citypages.com/2012-06-20/news/archbishop-john-nienstedt-crusades-against-gay-marriage

He's probably even worse than the Chik-fil-A president.

Again, the average Catholic is quite far of the teachings of the Church.

[So the Heroes Fall]

BTW since Yelnoc has been fairly defensive of Catholicism in the past (inexplicably, since he obviously isn't Catholic), he might want to familiarize himself with this guy: http://www.citypages.com/2012-06-20/news/archbishop-john-nienstedt-crusades-against-gay-marriage

He's probably even worse than the Chik-fil-A president.

Again, the average Catholic is quite far of the teachings of the Church.

That might be true, but I fail to see how that exonerates the church itself (note that he said he hates "the Baptist church", which is a far looser affiliation than the Catholic church), or why people with such extreme disagreement continue to be that way (and in many cases are still giving them money too.) You can just leave the church, it's not hard.

[Jayhawker]

Having attending a camp sponsored by Chick-Fil-A (and being a roomate with a Cathy!), I'm probably one of the biggest Chick-Fil-A supporters out there. Not necessarily because of their strong moral convictions, but because they have the best chicken sandwich in America.

I'm hungry now. Guess where I'm going???

[Joe Republic]

Speaking of "strong moral convictions", Chick-Fil-A's next crusade is to ensure its female employees have the opportunity to spend more time raising their families.  Just like Jesus would have wanted.

http://wonkette.com/479516/chick-fil-a-now-firing-women-so-they-can-stay-home-and-make-babies-for-jesus




What a fantastic company!