#351 Posted by Pibo47 (3166 posts) -

I used to love chick-fil-a...but sadly i will never be able to eat there again because of their use of company funds to help fuel hate groups against gay marriage.

#352 Posted by Pabba (334 posts) -

Never eaten at a Chick-fil-a, never will.

#353 Edited by Puddlesworth (59 posts) -

@ABK_92: @ABK_92 said:

@Puddlesworth said:

@ABK_92 said:

Wait so people are refusing to eat there now because of the CEO's opinion on gay marriage? My brain hurts.

No, it's because the company funnels millions of dollars a year into anti-gay hate groups.

edit: Although the funding anti-gay groups thing has been known about for years, the owner's opinion is what brought this spending into the public eye.

Oh no not the anti-gay groups I'm so afraid of all the harm they can cause. How dumb. Please don't respond to me with any more of your idiotic comments.

Wow....

Are you really denying the harm that hate groups cause, really? The fact that the stigmatization of the gay people is a major reason that suicide is so common in the gay community. That the fact that gay people can't marry in most of the country is blatantly discriminatory to any gay person that wants to marry, or their partners who are denied marriage benefits (financial and otherwise).

Man I don't care if anyone boycotts, or you say its not worth the effort or there are more important issues. Whatever that's up to you. But really? How is it idiotic to not want one's money to fund hate groups.

#354 Posted by DonutFever (3550 posts) -
@Flawed_System said:

@DonutFever said:

@Flawed_System said:

@DonutFever said:

@Flawed_System said:

@DonutFever said:

Quote 2: But can't they just be happy with a "Catholic Definition" that Catholics follow as part of their religion, separate from law that effects everyone? That's what I don't understand, there should be a separation of church and state, no?

You answered your own question. It effects everyone...religious included.

It provides everyone those freedoms. If gay marriage is legal, and no Christian gay couples are being married, then no, it doesn't effect them. It's not in their right to control what others can and can't do. We don't live in a Theocracy.

Marriage is important to Christians because it's a fundamental aspect of their religion [one of the seven sacraments]. If legislation is passed defining marriage as the joining of two parties it directly effects their belief system. This would cause a problem because Genesis specifically states that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Jesus, in the Old Testament, also defines marriage as a union between a man and woman.

A Theocracy implies that the Government is ruled directly by God with Priests or Bishops holding high governmental positions. The U.S. government is far from this.

Underlined: We can't just assume no gay Christian couples will want to be married.

Paragraph 1: Except marriage exists outside of Catholicism. People of other religious beliefs can get married, even Athiests can get married, 1). they just don't do so within Catholic churches. Paragraph 2: Yes, and it should stay this way. 2). Basing our laws off of religious beliefs is one step closer to that. Paragraph 3: Well, I said there could be a Catholic definition of marriage that churches follow. These laws won't force churches to marry gay couples, only make it so that the States recognize same-sex marriage, and they can at least be married at city hall or something.

1). Marriage is legally defined as a covenant between a man and a woman. If we redefine this definition, we redefine marriage, thus, Christian beliefs are affected. As long as we're specifically focusing on Catholicism, marriage is one of the seven sacraments, these sacraments are fundamental to the religion as a whole.

2). There are already laws founded on Christian moral teaching:

Thou Shall Not Kill

Thou Shall Not Steal

Thou Shall Not Covet thy Neighbors Goods

Thou Shall Not Covet Thy Neighbors Wife

You stated that the government should stay as it is. So you agree that basing our laws off of Christian morality is perfectly acceptable?

In addition, 2). is a Slippery Slope.

3). See #1 and we can't assume what will be in the legislation. Furthermore, by legally recognizing gay marriage, the state provides opportunities for discrimination suits against Churches who refuse to recognize homosexual couples.

1: Marriage exists outside of Catholicism, and laws allowing same-sex marriage won't force churches to marry gay couples, and therefore not your right to control. 
 
2: I never said you had to the polar opposite of religious teachings just because they are religious teachings. I'm saying there needs to be reasoning involving the real-life effects of laws. There is logic behind enforcing the first two (It encroaches on other people's freedom, and we don't enforce the last two, because that would be fucking stupid. Also, the first two are teachings of a variety of religions, not just Catholicism.  There is no logic behind anti-gay laws, just "The Bible says so! (And a lot of other things, but I wanna pick and choose the things that help me enforce my bigotry)". 
 
3: Except that gay marriage is legal in many states, and they have yet to run into the issues you've said.
#355 Posted by DonutFever (3550 posts) -
@ABK_92 said:

@Puddlesworth said:

@ABK_92 said:

Wait so people are refusing to eat there now because of the CEO's opinion on gay marriage? My brain hurts.

No, it's because the company funnels millions of dollars a year into anti-gay hate groups.

edit: Although the funding anti-gay groups thing has been known about for years, the owner's opinion is what brought this spending into the public eye.

Oh no not the anti-gay groups I'm so afraid of all the harm they can cause. How dumb. Please don't respond to me with any more of your idiotic comments.

They're working towards making being gay an offence punishable by death in Uganda, and the most of the attendants of the "Pray the Gay Away Camps" end up committing suicide sooner or later, or return to being gay. Guess which one said camps would label a "failure" when they give out statistics involving their "success rate". 
 
@RaceKickfist said:

because chik-fil-a's are independently owned and operated, I'm not sure I find boycotting them an effective means of getting your point across. it seems like the corporate headquarters is mostly to blame for the public statement (which i dont think is "boycott-worthy" since everyone is entitled to an opinion, free speech, etc.), and the donations of millions of dollars to pro-traditional marriage foundations. What I think most people take issue with is where the money goes, but wouldn't boycotting the restaurants also carry the potential for damaging locally owned and operated business that might not even agree with that corporate mandate? does chik-fil-a make it part of their franchise agreement that every individual restaurant ante-up for charitable donations for specific groups (in this case, pro-traditional marriage groups)? seems like punishing the middle man to me.

I dunno, it just seems like none of this ordeal is as cut-and-dry as either side claim it is. Regardless of my personal thoughts on homosexuality, I think it's previously taboo considerations have flip-flopped and it seems like being gay is totally "in" now (ha! being "out" is "in!" I made a slogan), and I truly think homosexual marriage is an inevitability in our society.


1: Calling them "pro-traditional" or "pro-family" groups doesn't really do them justice. 
 
2: Money is fungible, so every time a chain makes money, that money goes towards anti-gay groups. 
 
3: It'll take one or two generations before being homosexual is "in".
#356 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

Right this second, I realized I've likely never seen a Chick-Fil-A in my life. Should that freak me the eff out?

#357 Edited by PrivateIronTFU (3874 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

Right this second, I realized I've likely never seen a Chick-Fil-A in my life. Should that freak me the eff out?

I think most of them are in the south. I live in Washington, and there's only 1 Chick-Fil-A in the entire state. And I didn't know it existed until just now. CORRECTION: That one single restaurant closed last year. So no, there are zero Chick-Fil-A restaurants in Washington.

Of course, I'm fairly sure there are absolutely NO Chick-Fil-A restaurants on the moon. So no, that shouldn't freak you the eff out.

#358 Edited by Turambar (6707 posts) -

I just have to say, the whole Chick-Fil-A appreciation day thing has been fucking hilarious.  Absurdity is being committed on all three sides: Chick-Fil-A's owner for being a public bigot, the mayors of Boston and Chicago talking as if they have any legal right to bar a company from doing business within city limits for something protected under the first amendment, and Americans that feel the best way to support anti-gay marriage / anti-government overreach is to eat chicken sandwiches. 

#359 Posted by corpulateguitar@gmail.com (38 posts) -

plain and simple. No its not that great at all in fact i will go as far as to say its actually kinda shitty.

#360 Posted by PrivateIronTFU (3874 posts) -

@Turambar said:

I just have to say, the whole Chick-Fil-A appreciation day thing has been fucking hilarious. Absurdity is being committed on all three sides: Chick-Fil-A's owner for being a public bigot, the mayors of Boston and Chicago talking as if they have any legal right to bar a company from doing business within city limits for something protected under the first amendment, and Americans that feel the best way to support anti-gay marriage / anti-government overreach is to eat chicken sandwiches.

Yeah, I'm kinda pissed off about the mayors. It's just so not legal, and all it's going to do is give Republicans ammunition against Democrats. Luckily, they'll squander it like they always do, but still...

#361 Posted by notdavid (835 posts) -

They have damn fine fries, but nothing I can't find somewhere else.

#362 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4308 posts) -

Oh Americans and their problems........  Also thanks for reminding me to watch a video in my subscription box.  

#363 Posted by President_Barackbar (3448 posts) -

@PrivateIronTFU said:

Of course, I'm fairly sure there are absolutely NO Chick-Fil-A restaurants on the moon. So no, that shouldn't freak you the eff out.

Did someone say "franchise opportunity?" I can corner the market!

#364 Posted by PrivateIronTFU (3874 posts) -

@President_Barackbar said:

@PrivateIronTFU said:

Of course, I'm fairly sure there are absolutely NO Chick-Fil-A restaurants on the moon. So no, that shouldn't freak you the eff out.

Did someone say "franchise opportunity?" I can corner the market!

I'll get to work on my low-gravity chicken farm.

#365 Posted by Thanatos3 (80 posts) -

They should have said nothing. Openly supporting that some people should have less rights than others based on something they cannot control is...foolish.

#366 Edited by spartanlolz92 (511 posts) -

@Vodun said:

@SpaceInsomniac said:

@Vodun said:

@Flawed_System said:

@Vodun said:

1). Then I see no point in responding to you any further.

Note: You can't separate a person from their religious beliefs any more than you can separate them from their sexuality.

Religion is a choice, sexuality you are born with.

Just because it's a choice doesn't make it less a part of who you are. There is a reason Catholic priests and nuns decide to abstain from sex, and devote their lives to God. One could make the argument that choices like these are much more of "who we are" than aspects of our lives that are out of our control. If someone is left handed, bi-sexual, and devotes their life to helping those in need, which of those three things do you think is the most defining aspect of their character?

I have chosen to become an interaction designer. I have studied to become one for a long time and now I work as one. It pretty much defines who I am at the moment, yet it was a choice and I can choose not to be one at any time. How much something defines you as a person has nothing to do with the choice aspect of it. You are born left-handed and bi-sexual, you choose to follow a religion. You might be born into a family that follows a religion, but many have chosen to go down another path. Helping others is also a choice (and not an exclusive christian trait).

If you are a christian, do you immediately have to stone all adulterers? No, because you choose to ignore that because it doesn't fit in modern society. If you see someone working on a Sunday, do you take the nearest blunt object and batter them to death? Once again, you choose not to follow that particular little religious quirk.

ummm have you even read the bible specifically the part where jesus condems people stoning a woman for adultery and shames them for it. so please don't spout such nonsense ^^^^^

At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

“No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin

#367 Posted by Osaladin (2515 posts) -

I think it's pretty good, and still go there every once in a while. Political/Religious views are one thing, food is another. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean you can't do business with them.

#368 Posted by mandude (2669 posts) -

@Osaladin said:

I think it's pretty good, and still go there every once in a while. Political/Religious views are one thing, food is another. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean you can't do business with them.

Yeah, but if you know that they're going to actively lobby against you with the money you just gave them, you'd probably be less inclined to do so.

#369 Posted by Stonyman65 (2654 posts) -

I'd say it's better than the stuff you can get from Wendy's, McDonald's and Burger King, but I wouldn't call it "good". It's pretty much your standard fast-food style chicken sandwich.

#370 Posted by Osaladin (2515 posts) -

@mandude said:

@Osaladin said:

I think it's pretty good, and still go there every once in a while. Political/Religious views are one thing, food is another. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean you can't do business with them.

Yeah, but if you know that they're going to actively lobby against you with the money you just gave them, you'd probably be less inclined to do so.

There's so many things that go against people's beliefs that people buy every day, they just don't know about it. I don't really see how it's that much of a difference. I don't know, I guess it just doesn't bother me as much as others.

#371 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

Damn all this anti gay hate really makes me want to try some chick fil a but I don't think we have them in Canada.

#372 Posted by MikeinSC (896 posts) -

How much of the gas all of you put in your cars comes from countries that REALLY, REALLY hate gay people?

Show a consistent stance and stop buying gas entirely.

#373 Edited by mandude (2669 posts) -

@Osaladin said:

@mandude said:

@Osaladin said:

I think it's pretty good, and still go there every once in a while. Political/Religious views are one thing, food is another. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean you can't do business with them.

Yeah, but if you know that they're going to actively lobby against you with the money you just gave them, you'd probably be less inclined to do so.

There's so many things that go against people's beliefs that people buy every day, they just don't know about it. I don't really see how it's that much of a difference. I don't know, I guess it just doesn't bother me as much as others.

That's absolutely true, but people are always going to stick by and defend their passions. If homosexuals never stood up for themselves, simply because there are more important issues in the world, homosexuality would probably still be outright illegal. There are a million more important issues to be focusing on, but that goes for nearly any issue. You just have to stick by the progress you want to see happen in the world, and trust that others will stand by and work on the progress they want to make. It's the same fundamental principle behind teamwork, and I definitely think there is merit to operating in this way.

#374 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

@MikeinSC said:

How much of the gas all of you put in your cars comes from countries that REALLY, REALLY hate gay people?

Show a consistent stance and stop buying gas entirely.

I think these things are taken on a case by case basis. Don't ask me why though I personally never care about these sorts of things because I dont want to be an annoying idiot.

#375 Edited by Spike94 (735 posts) -

@sissylion said:

@Spike94 said:

It really is.

It's the best chicken I've had in this life.

I'm so sorry for you.

Why? It's not like they aren't serving to gay people- the views of the owner are the views of the owner. Yes, he spends money on anti-gay marriage groups and campaigns, but that is how he chooses to spend his money. You have the freedom to not eat there. Don't call me a freaking bigot because I still choose to. This entire "you're a bigot if you like Chick-Fil-A" is completely ignorant.

EDIT: No edit. I simply double-checked if money really was being spent on anti-gay things, and, according to snopes, it is.

#376 Posted by Animasta (14667 posts) -

@Spike94 said:

@sissylion said:

@Spike94 said:

It really is.

It's the best chicken I've had in this life.

I'm so sorry for you.

Why? It's not like they aren't serving to gay people- the views of the owner are the views of the owner. Yes, he spends money on anti-gay marriage groups and campaigns, but that is how he chooses to spend his money. You have the freedom to not eat there. Don't call me a freaking bigot because I still choose to. This entire "you're a bigot if you like Chick-Fil-A" is completely ignorant.

or they could mean that you think fast food chicken is the best chicken you've ever had in your life is pretty sad

#377 Posted by Bloodgraiv3 (2712 posts) -

Never had it.

#378 Posted by AlexW00d (6226 posts) -

@MikeinSC said:

How much of the gas all of you put in your cars comes from countries that REALLY, REALLY hate gay people?

Show a consistent stance and stop buying gas entirely.

Please do this everyone so the rest of the world can get fuel as cheap as Americans.

#379 Posted by Joeyoe31 (820 posts) -

The food there, and by food I mean chicken sandwich, is one of the better fast food sandwiches.

@Dagbiker said:

@Jumbs: The company isn't bigotry. It is all blown out of porportion. This is from Chick-fil-A's own website

Chick-fil-A is a family-owned and family-led company serving the communities in which it operates. From the day Truett Cathy started the company, he began applying biblically-based principles to managing his business. For example, we believe that closing on Sundays, operating debt-free and devoting a percentage of our profits back to our communities are what make us a stronger company and Chick-fil-A family.
The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our Restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect –regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 1,600 Restaurants run by independent Owner/Operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.Our mission is simple: to serve great food, provide genuine hospitality and have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.

http://www.chick-fil-a.com/FAQ#?category=1

Also this.

Also they've had this stance for years now, don't know why it's such a big deal all of a sudden.

#380 Posted by NickL (2246 posts) -
@Dagbiker

@pyromagnestir said:

@Dagbiker: Well of course that's what they say, they still want some people to buy their product, doesn't make there owner any less of a close minded religious dickhat.

It's a pretty fucking good chicken sandwich. Definitely the best option fast food wise, in my opinion.

Yes, but the owner is not the company.

The company follows the owners beliefs though. For instance, even though it would probably be a profitable venture they won't expand to las Vegas because the owner believes it is a city full of sin.
#381 Posted by TheUnsavedHero (1255 posts) -

I was never a fan of Chick-fil-a. That plus they are very public about banning same sex marriages. So fuck 'em.

#382 Posted by sissylion (679 posts) -

@Animasta said:

or they could mean that you think fast food chicken is the best chicken you've ever had in your life is pretty sad

Ring-a-ding-ding.

#383 Posted by Jrad (621 posts) -

@BirdkeeperDan said:

I really think people here hating on the Chic-Fil-A founder are insane. I've heard the guy speak and he seemed pretty nice. America is pretty much split in terms of this view http://www.gallup.com/poll/154529/half-americans-support-legal-gay-marriage.aspx. So half of America is bigots? Personally I don't care how government defines marriage or anything else; I don't feel that government reflects on me personally. If I ever go down to the States I'll be sure to go to Chic-Fil-A for spite: I might buy a second one for the birds.

I know this post is over a week old, but yes: half of America are bigots. 43% wouldn't vote for an atheist, regardless of his qualifications or political alignment. Maybe not exactly half, but damned close.

#384 Posted by Bigheart711 (1253 posts) -

Even though I eat there sometimes, I'm not really a fan of Chic-Fil-A, especially since they actually give their earned money to so-called "correction" camps and other places that are on Bullshit Island about same-sex marriage. I normally go for either Wendy's chicken sandwiches or KFC for their chicken in general anyways.

#385 Edited by thebipsnbeeps (545 posts) -

@jakob187 said:

Besides, I prefer Raising Cane's. The only reason I ever went to Chick-Fil-A was for the waffle fries.

Support this 200 percent. I don't know how common a Cane's is outside of Baton Rouge, but they're chicken strips are pretty fantastic when you want something good and quick. There was a time when I would know Chick-Fil-A as the quality fast-food chicken, but Cane's raises the fucking BAR in comparison.

Also: crazy how a thread that just simply asked whether Chick-Fil-A was all it cracks up to be blew into a big discussion about national rights and what is considered just in a society. Speaks louder than "yea" or "nay," eh?