Holy Cow! Chik-fil-a Backed Down

[ShesAPirate]

The discussion of equal rights for homosexuals often confuses different topics as it has here. It is not about acceptance or tolerance, it is about equal civil rights in the eyes of the law. (General) you can think homosexuality is wrong, a choice, a sin, or anything else. No on wants to police your thoughts. What you shouldn't be able to do is base someone's civil rights on what you feel is or isn't a sin.

I think adultery is wrong, in some situations I feel abortion is wrong. I do not want adulterers stripped of any of their civil rights and I'm pro-chioce. It isn't what a person thinks that is at the heart of this issue, it is what the government uses as a reason to give one group of American citizens a different set of rights than another group of American citizens. The granting of equal rights to gay Americans does not harm anyone who is not gay. It isn't taking rights away from us and giving it to them. It isn't a zero sum game.

I don't and never cared about what the owner believes in his heart. I choose not to go to CFA because a portion of the profits were actively funding what I consider a hate group.

Dang firedancer, I remember the days I used to disagree with you about pretty much everything. Now, it's just the opposite. GREAT post!!

I was just going to post almost the same thing as ugadog99: I've never agreed more with a post by FireDancer. One of the best posts I've ever read on the Dis

 

[RadioNate]

The discussion of equal rights for homosexuals often confuses different topics as it has here. It is not about acceptance or tolerance, it is about equal civil rights in the eyes of the law. (General) you can think homosexuality is wrong, a choice, a sin, or anything else. No on wants to police your thoughts. What you shouldn't be able to do is base someone's civil rights on what you feel is or isn't a sin.

I think adultery is wrong, in some situations I feel abortion is wrong. I do not want adulterers stripped of any of their civil rights and I'm pro-chioce. It isn't what a person thinks that is at the heart of this issue, it is what the government uses as a reason to give one group of American citizens a different set of rights than another group of American citizens. The granting of equal rights to gay Americans does not harm anyone who is not gay. It isn't taking rights away from us and giving it to them. It isn't a zero sum game.

I don't and never cared about what the owner believes in his heart. I choose not to go to CFA because a portion of the profits were actively funding what I consider a hate group.

This. 110x this.

And I'll add. Do we, as a country, really want to start legislating based on one specific religion's beliefs? If we start doing that how are we "better" than Iran or Afghanistan? I'm not Christian.

This was corporate donations to some pretty extreme groups. Ones I didn't want any part of my dollars supporting.

I'm hoping that this is true.

 

[Disneylove1228]

Ill-guided but still not oppressive unless oppression is only a one-way street. The gay agenda demands that everyone accept their lifestyle. Those who do not are labeled homophobic and widely denounced. Isn't that oppressive?

I like this statement, I like it a lot.

I stood in line that day and waited 30 minutes for my meal at an off time, 3 o'clock in the afternoon. I for one, saw, felt, heard, sensed in every way possible a presence of patriotism.

I'm not saying that going to CFA on a day huckabee announced made me patriotic, but when people come together, to show support, (for anything, really) it's different to experience this. With that being said... it is in my 2 cents that I feel this company should do whatever they want with their money, however they want. If people want to accept their money talking about God, and the Bible.. then so what? I can tell you that you don't have to go far for teachers and professors to cast their opinion or sway students going to normal schools in your neighborhoods who do the same for opposing views. I'm done... carry on

 

[eliza61]

The discussion of equal rights for homosexuals often confuses different topics as it has here. It is not about acceptance or tolerance, it is about equal civil rights in the eyes of the law. (General) you can think homosexuality is wrong, a choice, a sin, or anything else. No on wants to police your thoughts. What you shouldn't be able to do is base someone's civil rights on what you feel is or isn't a sin.

I think adultery is wrong, in some situations I feel abortion is wrong. I do not want adulterers stripped of any of their civil rights and I'm pro-chioce. It isn't what a person thinks that is at the heart of this issue, it is what the government uses as a reason to give one group of American citizens a different set of rights than another group of American citizens. The granting of equal rights to gay Americans does not harm anyone who is not gay. It isn't taking rights away from us and giving it to them. It isn't a zero sum game.

I don't and never cared about what the owner believes in his heart. I choose not to go to CFA because a portion of the profits were actively funding what I consider a hate group.

Well said Firedancer

 

[Hrhpd]

I like this statement, I like it a lot.

I stood in line that day and waited 30 minutes for my meal at an off time, 3 o'clock in the afternoon. I for one, saw, felt, heard, sensed in every way possible a presence of patriotism.

I'm not saying that going to CFA on a day huckabee announced made me patriotic, but when people come together, to show support, (for anything, really) it's different to experience this. With that being said... it is in my 2 cents that I feel this company should do whatever they want with their money, however they want. If people want to accept their money talking about God, and the Bible.. then so what? I can tell you that you don't have to go far for teachers and professors to cast their opinion or sway students going to normal schools in your neighborhoods who do the same for opposing views. I'm done... carry on

You are right.

They have every right to do what they want with their money.

Their potential customers also have every right to do what they want with their money. They have every right to disagree with the company's funding of hate groups and to spend their money at other fast food restaurants.

Since this is a for-profit business, their abrupt change in views can only be attributed to a change in their bottom line. It seems that their bottom line is more important than supporting and funding hate groups as it should be in a business.

I do not get your reference to schools and their teachings?

 

[Disneylove1228]

You are right.

They have every right to do what they want with their money.

Their potential customers also have every right to do what they want with their money.

However, since this is a for-profit business, their abrupt change in views can only be attributed to a change in their bottom line. It seems that their bottom line is more important than supporting and funding hate groups as it should be in a business.

I do not get your reference to schools and their teachings?

lol... you're kidding right?? I'm trying to tread softly here while on the dis, for fear of offending anyone... and I don't want to get too serious, so I'm just going to say that you can probably figure out what I'm getting to as far as main stream media and the ways schools tend to sway students with their thinking. It wasn't long since I graduated high school myself, about 10 years ago, and I can speak from experience that teachers tried to put too much unnecessary input on their students. That's all!! I'm out.

 

[Hrhpd]

The discussion of equal rights for homosexuals often confuses different topics as it has here. It is not about acceptance or tolerance, it is about equal civil rights in the eyes of the law. (General) you can think homosexuality is wrong, a choice, a sin, or anything else. No on wants to police your thoughts. What you shouldn't be able to do is base someone's civil rights on what you feel is or isn't a sin.

I think adultery is wrong, in some situations I feel abortion is wrong. I do not want adulterers stripped of any of their civil rights and I'm pro-chioce. It isn't what a person thinks that is at the heart of this issue, it is what the government uses as a reason to give one group of American citizens a different set of rights than another group of American citizens. The granting of equal rights to gay Americans does not harm anyone who is not gay. It isn't taking rights away from us and giving it to them. It isn't a zero sum game.

I don't and never cared about what the owner believes in his heart. I choose not to go to CFA because a portion of the profits were actively funding what I consider a hate group.

add me to the excellent post club.

 

[calypso726]

Ill-guided but still not oppressive unless oppression is only a one-way street. The gay agenda demands that everyone accept their lifestyle. Those who do not are labeled homophobic and widely denounced. Isn't that oppressive?

Married hetero woman chiming in here ...
There is no gay agenda Thinking that allowing gays to have the same rights as heteros means you are forced to accept their lifestyle doesn't make sense. That is like saying, allowing people of religious faiths (that are different from yours) to get married, means that you are demanded to accept their lifestyle, choices and beliefs. Clearly, since people of all faiths, differing faiths and even no faith can get married in this country (so long as they are hetero) it is of no consequence to you and those who belive as you do. It doesn't change your faith or beliefs. You aren't forced to accept or even learn about other religions. I do not see how allowing gays to have the same rights to marry the person they love is any different. It doesn't affect you in any way, shape or form. A marriage is based on love, trust, respect, support, and faith in one another. It is not based on gender.

How, exactly, were they oppressing anyone? They didn't refuse to serve or employ anyone. The owner of a privately owned company with known Christian values stated his opinion that he supports the Biblical definition of marriage. That is his right as an American citizen. It is, of course your right to disagree but there is no oppression here. Had CFA refused service to or employment of gays, you might make a case for oppression. It did not.

Of course he has a right to his beliefs. That's not the issue. The issue is that the WinShape Foundation which is wholly owned by Chick Fil A was donating money to groups like The Family Research Council. The FRC was lobbying Congress on a resolution to denounce the Uganda “kill the gays” bill. Sorry, but I have no desire to support any company that funds organizations that think it is ok to put people to death for being gay.

As for his belief in the Biblical definition of marriage. I got no problem with that. I wish he would clarify which biblical definition of marriage though. Would that be Genesis 4:19 where it is ok to marry 2 women? Genesis 29:16-30 where you can sell your daughters into marriage? Exodus 6:20 where it is ok to marry your aunt. Deuteronomy 22:13-20 where you should stone your new wife to death if she isn't a virgin. Exodus 22:16 Whereby if a woman is raped she must marry the rapist. 2 Samuel 5:13 A man can have concubines in addition to his wife/wives. Curious minds want to know ...

What has changed? I thought it was always the owner made charitable contributions to anti-gay groups with the money he earned and that CFA did not contribute.

What I do with the money I earn from my job is mine to donate. It is not a reflection on the company. I think the owner is make poor charitable donation choices and he may think the same of mine.

I totally agree but that wasn't the case here. Chick Fil A, the corporation, wholly owns the Winshape Foundation which was funding the hate groups. It wasn't that the owner was making donations with his money. Chick Fil A was through the foundation they own.

 

[ICF]

Really? Have you been in a CFA recently? Of course not because you're boycotting. Every single one I've been to has been just as busy as before you started your "boycott."

exactly....

especially when many of the "protesters" were people that said..."I've never been there, but now I have no intention of going". Huh???

I've been many times since this issue caused such a stir....and they've been just as busy as ever.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

A straight person can marry who they choose. A gay person cannot.

How is that not an equal rights\protection issue?

In the same way donating to the KKK isn't the same as telling a black person they have to sit in the back of the bus. Both may seem disgusting in their own way, but they are not the same.


As for the protest causing a change of heart, I have my doubts. Anyone with strong feelings on a subject, particularly a volatile one, will just dig in their heels harder when hit head-on with opposition. It's my understanding that various gay rights groups reached out to CFA in a respectful manner and asked to meet with the owners. I don't know what, if anything came of that. But, I suspect those actions spoke much louder than a bunch of noisy protests

 

[Buckalew11]

My husband, my wife and I aren't quite sure what to think of all this.

What? Who? lol "My husband, my wife and I..." Am I missing something.

I'll be interested to see CFA's numbers because I am sure they have not been hurting around here.
I'm thinking it is more a change of heart that it was hurting their pocketbook.

Is there a list that someone has handy of where I can see where this money goes or was going?

 

[Gumbo4x4]

False. All gays want is to be able to do the same things everyone else does and not be harassed or treated as second class citizens. They don't give a flip whether anyone accepts the lifestyle or not. On the contrary, the one's demanding everyone accept their idea of an ideal lifestyle, are the ones with an agenda to keep gays as second class citizens.

Ennghh, wrong answer. Do I believe that the above is true of MOST gays? Sure. But, there are a LOT of very vocal folks who want way more. I have a gay cousin - my favorite cousin, as a matter of fact. And I love ALL my cousins. She fits your description as does her wonderful partner. And you know what? They do go about life w/o hassle. OTOH, my wife also has a gay cousin. He gets hassled a lot - and it's always been that way for him. Not because he's gay, but because he's the kind of jerk PP described who just happens to use the fact that he's gay to stir up even more trouble. I struggle not to punch him in the face every time I see him & I haven't hit anyone since I was 17

 

[Sugardimples]

I still won't eat there.

 

[nuttylawprofessor]

It's not necessarily about lost profits. It's about lost potential profits. Several cities where CFA has tried expand have stated that they will oppose any further expansion because of the donation policies.

 

[Acklander]

I still won't eat there.

Same here.

 

[Acklander]

It's not necessarily about lost profits. It's about lost potential profits. Several cities where CFA has tried expand have stated that they will oppose any further expansion because of the donation policies.

And lots of students wanted them removed from campuses

 

[Gumbo4x4]

It's not necessarily about lost profits. It's about lost potential profits. Several cities where CFA has tried expand have stated that they will oppose any further expansion because of the donation policies.

Ironic, as any attempt at that would actually be imposing on CFA's rights. It's one thing to deny a permit to a strip club across the street from a school. But, any city wanting to deny CFA from expanding based on the owner's politics (whatever they are) is just begging for a giant lawsuit, one the cities would be sure to lose.

 

[monkeybug]

The discussion of equal rights for homosexuals often confuses different topics as it has here. It is not about acceptance or tolerance, it is about equal civil rights in the eyes of the law. (General) you can think homosexuality is wrong, a choice, a sin, or anything else. No on wants to police your thoughts. What you shouldn't be able to do is base someone's civil rights on what you feel is or isn't a sin.

I think adultery is wrong, in some situations I feel abortion is wrong. I do not want adulterers stripped of any of their civil rights and I'm pro-chioce. It isn't what a person thinks that is at the heart of this issue, it is what the government uses as a reason to give one group of American citizens a different set of rights than another group of American citizens. The granting of equal rights to gay Americans does not harm anyone who is not gay. It isn't taking rights away from us and giving it to them. It isn't a zero sum game.
I don't and never cared about what the owner believes in his heart. I choose not to go to CFA because a portion of the profits were actively funding what I consider a hate group.

Couldn't have said it better!

 

[Hrhpd]

Ironic, as any attempt at that would actually be imposing on CFA's rights. It's one thing to deny a permit to a strip club across the street from a school. But, any city wanting to deny CFA from expanding based on the owner's politics (whatever they are) is just begging for a giant lawsuit, one the cities would be sure to lose.

Not necessarily. Many towns' voters have voted to block businesses from coming to their municipality.

The next town over from me has successfully kept Wal-Mart from expanding into their city for numerous years. And believe me, they have tried hard.

The voters are very vocal in not wanting Wal-Mart in their community.

Blocking CFA wouldn't be any different than blocking any other business.

 

[ronandannette]

The owner's opinion of gay marriage is irrelevant and he is certainly entitled to his opinions and his religious views. My complaint with CFA is that they were donating money to anti-gay organizations, some of which are so extreme in their deceptive, demonizing propaganda that they have been listed as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

...ah, yes that paragon of fair-minded and balanced evaluation! I consider much of what's been said here about CFA to be demonizing propaganda.