Chick-fil-A PR goes Rogue

[hondo]

Not at all. Money talks. Withholding your dollars from enterprises with which you disagree and supporting those whose practices -- environmental, political, whatever -- you align is a very effective way to make a difference and be heard. In a post-Citizens United world in which corporations can shape and dominate political discourse through Super Pacs, it seems imperative.

This isn't Dow Chemicals making napalm or an oil company spilling its product on the Gulf Coast. They make chicken sandwiches, for crying out loud. Their CEO has a certain view on a certain social issue that in the end hurts no one. There's no evidence he or a store manager in Cairo, Ga., has fired a gay employee, not hired an employee because of sexual orientation or turned a customer away because of sexual orientation. (If they had, we would have heard the screaming). No matter how much money he contributes to an organization against the gay lifestyle, it's not going to stop a committed gay couple from getting married or having a civil union.
Geez, the depths some of you will go to get indignant is unbelievable.

That's all great. But I have plenty of choices as to where I can purchase a chicken sandwich and it's certainly not going to be at Chik-Fil-A. It's a company that will not have me for a customer.

I'm sure they're devastated by that.

 

[hondo]

Again.... is the Chick-Fil-A controversy about blacks?

I come to SJ expecting members here to have common sense and/or critical-thinking skills. I believe you own those skills and are intentionally playing ignorant. I refuse to play along with intentional dummy posts.

It's a legit question that you don't want to answer because, A. you don't have an answer, or B. it blows your argument out of the water.

And one of the quickest ways to get African-Americans mad is to compare their struggle in the 50s and 60s to gay rights. There have never been separate water fountains or restaurant counters or bathrooms or schools for gays.

 

[hondo]

So the argument has seriously become (at some points in this thread) that either you must fight every injustice in the world, or you get to fight none without being called a hypocrite?

Nobody is tossing around the "H" word.

Au contraire.

His money is.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/09/28/census-reports-more-than-130000-same-sex-couples-say-theyre-married/

That's 65,000 gay marriages. If the Chick-Fil-A owner is trying to stop gay marriage with his money, he's not doing a real good job.

Which nationally successful chain of Muslim-owned restaurants donating large sums of money to American anti-gay marriage initiatives do you suggest we start with?

Does it matter? If you patronized a business and found out it was owned by someone who advocated the death penalty for gays and lived under a system that kept women as virtual slaves, would you continue to patronize it? Or is your indignation reserved only for those of the Western, Christian faith?

By the way, where did you see the word "Muslim" in my post?

Are there currently other, non-Sharia countries in which the state penalty for homosexuality is death?

What the heck does that matter? Isn't one one too many?

Please see my answers to that same question upthread. Thanks.

By the way, can we take your statement to mean you're okay with imprisonment or the death penalty for gays as long as it happens in a country that practices Sharia law?

Of course not.

Glad you cleared that up. So basically, you're a hypocrite: you're going to rag on Chick-Fil-A 's CEO for merely giving financial support to organizations that are only against the gay lifestyle and gay marriage (while not discriminating against gays who work for him or gay customers), but you're going to be silent on entire religions and governments (usually one and the same) that not only are against gays but gladly kill or imprison them -- along with their historical discrimination against women.

There was an entire discussion of specks and logs and all kinds of other shirt. Everything we DO in our life is about choices. You can't fight everything, you can't win everything. You have to pick the things that matter to you.

You tryng to tell me that it's that much of an effort to publicly state or even think that if it's bad for CFA's CEO to contribute money to organizations against gay marriage, it's worse for entire countries to kill and imprison gays, let alone their treatment of women? Give me a break. Doesn't women being second- or third-class citizens in many countries bother you in the slightest?

 

[YGBFKM]

What is the political benefit of coming out against Muslim atrocities? Or any bad stuff that doesn't allow for brow-beating the other side? It's better to completely ignore things like that and instead accuse others of hating entire groups of people. Nuance and perspective are for pussies.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

If you eat at Chick-Fil-A because they are against gay marriage, yet buy things from Amazon, you are a hypocrite.

 

[YGBFKM]

I don't buy anything from Amazon.

 

[Tom Petty]

I don't buy anything from Amazon.

to be fair, that would require reading.

 

[YGBFKM]

"To" be fair ...

 

[Stitch]

So how many defenders of traditional marriage here are married, and haven't had sex out of wedlock, been divorced, or married someone who was divorced?

 

[YGBFKM]

Don't be a deck.

 

[DanielSimpsonDay]

So how many defenders of traditional marriage here are married, and haven't had sex out of wedlock, been divorced, or married someone who was divorced?

 

[doctorquant]

So how many defenders of traditional marriage here are married, and haven't had sex out of wedlock, been divorced, or married someone who was divorced?

Not sure I am a "defender of traditional marriage" in this sense. I am profoundly leery of government's being given the power to dictate what shall now be recognized as a marriage. I've been married for 20 years, and neither my wife nor I had ever been married before (but neither of us had a "clean slate" on our wedding day, if you get my drift). Am I therefore a hypocrite for my leeriness?