1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Chick-fil-A PR goes Rogue

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Jul 26, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rusty Shackleford

    Rusty Shackleford Active Member

    But doesn't the law as it's written now prevent you from acting in a manner consistent with your beliefs if you're racist and it forces you to serve black people? Why do we force racist southern white business owners (a stereotype I know, but for purposes of illustration...) to serve black people, but we don't force religious southern white photography companies to serve (photograph) gay couples? What's the difference?

    I'm going to bow out of this argument. It's not going anywhere productive that I can see. I'll end by simply saying that I can't understand why somebody would be against gay marriage, and I pride myself on generally being able to see both sides of an issue. If the Bible tells you that being gay, and by extension gay marriage, is wrong and that's what you want to believe, then so be it, but as far as I can tell, doing so forces you to disregard one of the 10 commandments. You can hardly love your neighbor when you're telling him he can't get married, but you can, or that you'll photograph this straight couple's wedding but not that gay couple's. It's nobody on Earth's place to judge or condemn in this situation - if you're Christian, that's God's role. Your role is to love your neighbor, allow him the same rights you have, and if he sins (by being gay, or being gay and getting married) God will levy the appropriate punishment at the appropriate time.
     
  2. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    There's little/no difference, other than we as a society have settled on the former as OK (well, I am OK with it, but I don't want to speak for others around here).

    Well put.
     
  3. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    LOL ... from the looks at my statement of financial position, I might just qualify for that class!
     
  4. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Not trying to be a dick, but what made you uncomfortable about this? The fact that you would be expected to play up their religiosity as a positive attribute?
     
  5. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Can a grocery store owner refuse to sell food to someone if the owner knows the food will be used at a gay wedding? Can a hotel not sell a room to a gay couple, but allow straight couples to get a room?
     
  6. Big Circus

    Big Circus Well-Known Member

    Or, for that matter, TELL them to get a room.
     
  7. imjustagirl

    imjustagirl Active Member

    the fact I'd have to interview people about a faith I have no knowledge of. And I'd have to explain their faith and what it means in their life with no background or understand of why or how that would happen.

    Also, just writing about people crediting their life to god. Because it's not something I believe.
     
  8. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    I was going to say, my brother has become their lead activist ... he doesn't mind racking it up, he just has a philosophical opposition to paying it.
     
  9. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Is exploiting people getting married by charging an exorbitant amount for wedding photos just as much of a sin as supporting gay marriage?
     
  10. YGBFKM

    YGBFKM Guest

    The separate "Rainbow Rest Room" was a bit much.
     
  11. Oggiedoggie

    Oggiedoggie Well-Known Member

    I think that this whole dust-up was created by Chick-fil-A folks to draw attention away from some of their own fairly touchy gender issues.

    For years, they've been using cows as their spokes animals, completely ignoring the fact that most of the beef in hamburgers doesn't come from cows at all. The overwhelming majority of beef served in the United States comes from emasculated male cattle. They would be bulls by choice, but that choice (along with a few choice bits) was taken away.

    But, folks have more sympathy for the cuter mommy cows. "Oh, let's eat a chicken sandwich and save them!" The few cows that do wind up in hamburger are the over-the-hill stock from dairy or breeding herds, not the bucolic Holsteins that hold Chick-fil-A's advertising banners.

    I guess that they figured that a castrated male bovine holding an "Eat Mor Chiken!" sign just wouldn't have the same effect.
     
  12. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Enjoy (likely NSFW):



     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page