Chick-fil-A Stops Giving to Salvation Army, FCA Amid LGBT Protests

AACJ said:

This is a win for the godless. A loss of revenue may change their minds.

Click to expand...

They are attacked enough on every side. They will still have my full support. They are trying to make a living in an ever more evil world. May God bless them & guide their corporation.

dzheremi said:

99.999% of people don't care about this stuff, on either side. Does the chicken sandwich still taste good? Then most people will eat it.

It is actually kind of silly to expect any corporation to maintain a moral stance on anything. If the same pressure had been brought to bear upon Hobby Lobby, they too would have caved. People within these corporations certainly have their own stances, but the corporation itself is essentially amoral (which really shoots the concept of corporations being 'people' and having rights, but that was only gained via the court system relatively recently anyway). They just want to make as much money as possible. If they didn't, they wouldn't be a very good corporation.

Click to expand...

I agree with much of what you said in principle, except your tangent of corporations are not people. The corporate entity is a collection of people, a collection of people to make a buck. A reason a corporate entity will submit under your scenario is entirely because the corporate entity is comprised of people wanting to make a buck, and if the people in the corporate entity have thinner wallets, then this is an inducement for them act. A corporation is brick and mortar, a lifeless entity, that does not act without the human beings, the homo sapiens, who comprise the corporation.

We had nuggets and waffle fries last night. Just sayin

Sounds like they are coming in on a wing and a prayer............

thecolorsblend said:

They chickened out, I can’t believe it!

Click to expand...

...and having a cow, instead. The nugget of non-PC is hard to swallow.

Tigger45 said:

We had nuggets and waffle fries last night. Just sayin

Click to expand...

Did they turn you gay, or are you just fry-curious?

Tigger45 said:

We had nuggets and waffle fries last night. Just sayin

Click to expand...

I think I'll go back and eat at Chick-Fil-A again some time.

dzheremi said:

Did they turn you gay, or are you just fry-curious?

Click to expand...

Lol.

dzheremi said:

Did they turn you gay, or are you just fry-curious?

Click to expand...

Let's just say fries are one of the few things I will waffle on.

dzheremi said:

99.999% of people don't care about this stuff, on either side. Does the chicken sandwich still taste good? Then most people will eat it.

It is actually kind of silly to expect any corporation to maintain a moral stance on anything. If the same pressure had been brought to bear upon Hobby Lobby, they too would have caved. People within these corporations certainly have their own stances, but the corporation itself is essentially amoral (which really shoots the concept of corporations being 'people' and having rights, but that was only gained via the court system relatively recently anyway). They just want to make as much money as possible. If they didn't, they wouldn't be a very good corporation.

Click to expand...

Ask any successful entrepreneur. It’s never just about the money. Least of all a company like Chick-fil-A. Closing on Sundays cuts into profits quite a bit...

NotreDame said:

I agree with much of what you said in principle, except your tangent of corporations are not people. The corporate entity is a collection of people, a collection of people to make a buck. A reason a corporate entity will submit under your scenario is entirely because the corporate entity is comprised of people wanting to make a buck, and if the people in the corporate entity have thinner wallets, then this is an inducement for them act. A corporation is brick and mortar, a lifeless entity, that does not act without the human beings, the homo sapiens, who comprise the corporation.

Click to expand...

Take out the "make a buck" criterion and what you're describing is basically the same as one of those big dragon costumes involved in Chinese New Year parades sometimes.



Not sure if that's a relevant example for everyone who might post here, but they're similarly comprised of and piloted by a collection of people, all working together towards a common goal.


Look at this great person! Let's give it human rights! Let's let it donate to our elections! Let's imbue it with moral sentience!

This is a bad mistake by Chick-fil-A. They have a lot of competition with excellent products. I went to Chick-fil-A many times because of their Christian stance. Abandoning their beliefs will cause them to lose business, including mine.

98cwitr said:

Chick-fil-A Stops Giving to Salvation Army, FCA Amid LGBT Protests

Click to expand...

This is a good example of not knowing your customer base. While attempting to expand into leftwing markets (and presumably Europe) may seem like a good plan, those areas are full of people who hate the company and aren't likely to change their view. Meanwhile their loyal customer base is full of people who were pleased they stuck to their guns. A lot of those folls are going to stop going now that they've adopted worldly values. Not a smart business decision.

That's probably true. If there's one thing that the more radical left has yet to master or really even attempt it's forgiveness, so the people who hated Chic-Fil-A for its supposed 'anti-gay' stance will probably still hate it, while the people who loved it for its stance now feel betrayed. Time will tell what if any effect this will have on their bottom line (I still suspect that it will be minimal, or at least not as much as many people here might think, since again the vast majority of people just want a good-tasting, cheap meal), but I think at least in the world of social media, they're pretty well tarnished now.

They should have stood their ground. They were doing just fine.

I don't give to the Salvation Army. All the stuff we do for the lord.. I never expect any other believer to do. Nor would I give it a second look if they never do. Praise God glory to Jesus!

We do the same exact thing in our own lifes here and there. This is only ONE moment in time. YES its not the best choice but.. lets not toss them under the buss but PRAY for them!

I am just one person. They have what over 30,000 people working for them. Its so easy to think of just our selfs. But when you have thousands that depend on you.. that choice to stand gets very hard. Then its not just YOU making that choice. And to stop giving to some group.. really?

Blade said:

I don't give to the Salvation Army. All the stuff we do for the lord.. I never expect any other believer to do. Nor would I give it a second look if they never do. Praise God glory to Jesus!

We do the same exact thing in our own lifes here and there. This is only ONE moment in time. YES its not the best choice but.. lets not toss them under the buss but PRAY for them!

I am just one person. They have what over 30,000 people working for them. Its so easy to think of just our selfs. But when you have thousands that depend on you.. that choice to stand gets very hard. Then its not just YOU making that choice. And to stop giving to some group.. really?

Click to expand...

I look at the Salvation Army as a member of the Body of Christ, but as scripture tells us, each member has its role.

The Salvation Army has positively nailed the area of disaster relief. They've made it a science, an art. I'm not a member of that denomination, but for several years a youth group I helped lead worked out of one of their neighborhood centers, so I got a good look at the things a typical congregation does, and how well their operations are planned and maintained.

The SA owns trucks and has direct continuing contracts with food brokers (the companies that supply grocery stores and chains). Each of the congregations is an operations node, and their recreation centers are actually distribution hubs. The Salvation Army stores also serve as disaster supply inventory--clothing, furniture, household items, et certera.

To keep the entire operation constantly ticking, they move new inventory through their stores, but maintain a certain level (if they only stockpiled it, it would dry-rot, so they keep it moving). Many of their congregations run food programs so that their food contracts and the entire system continues to operate at a low level. All functions are continually exercised.

Then, when a disaster strikes anywhere, the system is ready to respond instantly.

So when there is a disaster, the smartest thing any congregations could do would be to throw support to the Salvation Army rather than work their own last-minute plans.

They should have stood their ground. The immoral forces at work in the world cannot stand Christian principles.

98cwitr said:

Chick-fil-A Stops Giving to Salvation Army,
FCA Amid LGBT Protests

Click to expand...

Yes. Chick-fil-A told you the answer: money.

Is this a surprise? Chick-fil-A is popular with everyone; if they can increase their sales by, say, 45% by alienating who they donate to (entities that are controversial for one, or any side) - why wouldn't they?

Chick-fil-A has a "Christian" philosophy because it sells when it comes to food (ironically, given the more sophisticated OT food laws); it is still a business, and must operate with the intent to make a profit. Morally (human standard), I see nothing wrong with this.

dzheremi said:

Take out the "make a buck" criterion and what you're describing is basically the same as one of those big dragon costumes involved in Chinese New Year parades sometimes.

Not sure if that's a relevant example for everyone who might post here, but they're similarly comprised of and piloted by a collection of people, all working together towards a common goal.

Look at this great person! Let's give it human rights! Let's let it donate to our elections! Let's imbue it with moral sentience!

Click to expand...

You think the analogy is a rebuttal? On what planet is a parade, that requires human beings, any refutation to the fact a corporation requires, guess what, human beings. The Chinese New Year’s parades are put on by human beings, the participants in the parade are human beings! The expressive message of the parade is made by human beings. The fact the humans are wearing costumes doesn’t alter the human being as engaging in the parade, and the human being engaged in expressive speech, and the dragon costume, a lifeless entity, is not on its own engaged in speech, just as a corporation is an entity in which people utilize to collectively express themselves and speak through, but it is the people doing the speaking. A corporation is, surprisingly for some apparently, made up of human beings. A corporate entity, much like that parade, cannot and doesn’t exist without human beings as a part of it and it is human beings who are acting and speaking.

So, your analogy was relevant, just not relevant to your hoped for rebuttal.

Mattin91 said:

They should have stood their ground. The immoral forces at work in the world cannot stand Christian principles.

Click to expand...

Well, can’t they still believe and profess a belief of not endorsing LGBTQ while shifting their funding?