Not just another Chic

I have a old hobby friend in Austin TX who created a thread down there that was an interesting read and has made "news" recently.

not sure what I should do,,

I support Gay Marriage, I support gay rights, bi's, TG, etc.. I am all for equal rights in this area.

But I dont really care what Don Cathy's personal beliefs are, he makes some damn good chicken!! if you believe marriage is man/woman only so be it..

I dont eat at Chic-fil-A that much, about 5 times a year, I kind of torn between food and my own values, but when I found out Chic-fil-A donates millions of dollars to fight against gay equality that bugs me...

so for now I am sitting on the fence until further information is gathered, but leaning toward banning them,

Originally Posted by RALPHEY BOY

From Forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworst...from-approval/

As to the basic point about gay marriage I can only offer my personal opinion: all for it. On the grounds that everyone’s going to understand the miserableness of us middle aged heteros a great deal better after 20 odd years of societally enforced monogamy. Slightly more seriously gay marriage or not gay marriage has little to do with a business column.
What does have to do with a business column is that this whole idea of a market means that we don’t have to care about the personal beliefs of either those who supply us or whom we supply. It’s the very impersonality of market exchange that means that it just doesn’t matter a darn what anyone’s sexual (or indeed any other) preference is. We get to care only about whether it’s a good chicken sandwich or whether the customer has enough money for one.

When the CEO of a company makes a "personal" comment about an issue of any kind should it "flavor" the customers attitude toward the corperation overall? Now that Chic-fil-a has a Kansas City presence - what do you think?

Ive ate there once, didnt think it was anything special, but with the stand they make on supporting the denial of cival rights to "any" group, I wont visit again

Ive ate there once, didnt think it was anything special, but with the stand they make on supporting the denial of cival rights to "any" group, I wont visit again Originally Posted by TShortKakes

TShort - that is part of the problem. The "stores" serve and hire without a problem. It is a personal "opinion" made by CEO, not the corperation. Is it ok for a "boss" to express their opinion on an issue? Should that opinion made a difference when making a buying decision? That is a cloud in the issue for many. Does that make a difference then, in your opinion?

I have been looking for, but have not yet found any claims of discrimination by gays who claim they were fired by Chic-Fil-A for being gay. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but thus far, I have not heard of any cases. My question is whether Chik-Fil-A puts the opinions of the CEO into practice by refusing to abide by laws in states that allow same sex partner benefits, or by firing someone if they are outted.

Having said that, it is known that the Chik-Fil-A corp has donated large amounts of money to various groups that promote intolerance and support anti-gay legislation. So, regardless of whether they are guilty of discriminatory hiring and firing practices, it is still reasonable to say that some of the profits from sales of their product - created by you and I - are going to fund intolerance and anti-gay policies.

For further perspective, it is worth noting that Starbucks, Oreo Cookies, Proctor and Gamble, Disney, Levi's Jean, Betty Crocker, Target, JC Penny's, Home Depot, and numerous other companies have been boycotted by Christian groups for taking pro-gay positions. So the idea of a boycott certainly isn't unusual. The only thing that makes the push to boycott Chik-Fil-A unusual is that in this case it just happens to be gay supporters who are doing the boycotting for a change.

I think the real take home message should be to corporations. Their job is to sell us stuff we don't need, not to get involved in political brouhahas that are guaranteed to generate support from some and condemnation from others.

For my part though, I've never eaten at Chik-Fil-A, so I guess I will never know what I'm missing.

....I think the real take home message should be to corporations. Their job is to sell us stuff we don't need, not to get involved in political brouhahas that are guaranteed to generate support from some and condemnation from others.

For my part though, I've never eaten at Chik-Fil-A, so I guess I will never know what I'm missing. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

Is the CEO speaking as a person or as the corperate entity?

Where is the option that I have eaten there before, and would eat there again. Oh well.

I find it sort of funny that 50% of the votes are for I would eat there just because of what the CEO said. Just ironic to me seeing what sort of a board this pool is posted on. Now if it was a poll on vacation bible school, I would think that, but here? Just surprising is all.

The only thing that really bothers me about the whole thing is that governments are saying they are going to not allow them to have stores in their city. Having stores getting banned because of something the CEO said is flat out dumb.

In case someone wants to jump on me for not being bothered by the donations and remarks you have to realize that is my belief that gay marrige is going to happen sooner rather than later. This is a fairly big cultural change that directly conflicts with many religions and you are dreaming if you think that there will be no battle. Even though the origins of marriage pre-date it being a religious event, religions views it as being a very religious event. That said, it is going to be an easier change then womens rights and ethnic rights in this country.

If a fairly conservative and religious state like Iowa can allow gay marriage it is a sign that it is going to change in a lot of other areas.

...

I find it sort of funny that 50% of the votes are for I would eat there just because of what the CEO said. Just ironic to me seeing what sort of a board this pool is posted on. Now if it was a poll on vacation bible school, I would think that, but here? Just surprising is all. Originally Posted by KSViking

The explanation may very well be that they are supporting the idea that someone shouldn't be condemned under considerations of free speech for truthfully answering a question about a publicized issue or allow the media to manipulate the message. It is a short step to their block. It is also a short switch to become the underdog.

In other words I may or may not agree with what he said but I will not assist vocal well entrenched purposeful activists in their attempt to restrict or penalize him for his forthrightness because the next time they may be after me.

Nice thing about a poll is that people can say things without giving a name.
I don't eat there- makes no difference 5 23.81%
I will not got there because of what was said by the CEO 3 14.29%
I will go there just because of what was said by the CEO 11 52.38%
I ate there before but will not go back 1 4.76%
I ate there before and will not go back 0 0%
no opinion 1 4.76%

Of the 21 votes 11 said they would go there because of what was said. And 1 of 4 could care less. Interesting responses.

Thanks to all who shared in post and/or the poll. We thought out and shared by all.

I see no problem with like gender couples myself. But I don't see that the CEO's behaviour is a deciding factor of what my behavior is.

IF they were refusing service or altering hiring practices that would be a different story to me. The formalization of Gay marriage is a difficult topic for me personally. I have very mixed emotions on it all.

The explanation may very well be that they are supporting the idea that someone shouldn't be condemned under considerations of free speech for truthfully answering a question about a publicized issue or allow the media to manipulate the message. It is a short step to their block. It is also a short switch to become the underdog.

In other words I may or may not agree with what he said but I will not assist vocal well entrenched purposeful activists in their attempt to restrict or penalize him for his forthrightness because the next time they may be after me. Originally Posted by bartipero

Well said, bart. SInce NTT's poll did not give the option to say "I've eaten there in the past and will continue to do so", I chose the selection "I'll eat there because of wha tthe CEO said". I do believe that it was Dan Cathy's own personal beliefs (not as CEO of Chik-Fil-a) regarding marriage and not the stance of Chik-Fil-a's corporation that they would discriminate against LGBT members in either providing service or employment - that would be a "death sentence" against the company.

BTW - I love their breakfast chicken biscuits (beter than QuikTrip's),

Ouch - sorry guys 2 of them are the same...
I ate there before but will not go back 1 4.76%
I ate there before and will not go back 0 0%

The one you needed was the:
I ate there before but will not go back 1 4.76%
I ate there before and will go back __ ___%

My apology folks. Did not double check the poll options.

I ate there before and I will go back

Ouch,

This discussion is strange.
A few reminders:

1. We have freedom of speech in this country.
   
2. It is OK of we disagree, but you have the right to say what you want, even if you are wrong; and so do I.
   
3. If you disagree with the opinion of another, just recognize that you have the same right to your opinion.
   
4. Distortion of the facts when making your speech only make you look bad.
   
5. Don't make things up out of your own feeling, and expect others to respect you.
   
6. One can state an opinion without being stupid, or emotional. It doesn't gain support.

Enough from me.

JR

It is much worse in Austin where the thread stated JR.

Ouch,

This discussion is strange.
A few reminders:

1. We have freedom of speech in this country.
   
2. It is OK of we disagree, but you have the right to say what you want, even if you are wrong; and so do I.
   
3. If you disagree with the opinion of another, just recognize that you have the same right to your opinion.
   
4. Distortion of the facts when making your speech only make you look bad.
   
5. Don't make things up out of your own feeling, and expect others to respect you.
   
6. One can state an opinion without being stupid, or emotional. It doesn't gain support.

Enough from me.

JR Originally Posted by JRLawrence

Why do people think that if they want to do something it must be a right? There is no "right" to marriage for anyone. Everyone can get married including gay people within the confines of the definition of marriage (one man, one woman, not related to each other and both of an age of consent). There is no gay marriage. Traditional marriage has never, NEVER lost an election in which the people got to choose.

Chik Fil A is about the right of free speech and not gay marriage. Mr. Cathy has no say on any kind of marriage or government action. He cannot make you pay more taxes or send your children off to war. He speaks for himself. The (for lack of a better term) gay Nazis want to stifle dissent and force their agenda on the country by legal fiat.
Adam Smith had a right to be a jerk and his boss had the right to fire his hateful ass.

Dare I point out that Ernst Rohm was gay and an early Nazi. This is not conclusive but so many of his subordinates also shared the same sexual proclivities until HItler had them killed. FYI, Rohm was leader of the "Brown Shirts".