Chick fil-a has caved to anti-Christian hate groups

[nChrist]

My family and I will stop eating anything from Chick-Fil-A. We'll have a clear conscience on how our money is spent. Our family is fairly large, so we will have an impact in several states. Other businesses cook and sell chicken, so we won't go without.

 

[Albion]

Why not. They are involved in exactly the same way in the lives of heterosexual couples.

The point remains that it's absurd to argue that whatever some group (assuming that all the members of it are identical to each other, which of course is not true) wants, society has an obligation to give it to them.

 

[grasping the after wind]

The 14th Amendment and several Supreme Court rulings demonstrate you're wrong.

They do nothing of the sort. Especially the Dred Scott ruling. The 14th Amendment has nothing to do with marriage as marriage is a legal institution not a natural right. Supreme Court rulings, which are legal opinions that are legally enforceable, just as the Dred Scott ruling was, do not have any more moral authority than anyone else's opinions. Truth is not a matter of 5 or more out of 9 voting a particular way.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

OK people, I have a Chik-fil-A solution!

1. Christians get to eat there Mon, Weds, Sat.
2. Gays get to eat there Tues, Thurs, Sun
3. Chik-fil-A is closed Friday for the Muslims.

4. No Jews?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

It is funny when a Fast food Restaurant is held to a higher standard of religious morality than elected officials.

 

[essentialsaltes]

They do nothing of the sort. Especially the Dred Scott ruling. The 14th Amendment

Dred Scott was before the 14th Amendment.

Supreme Court rulings … do not have any more moral authority than anyone else's opinions.

I'm not looking to them for moral authority.

Truth is not a matter of 5 or more out of 9 voting a particular way.

Correct. The truth is that Supreme Court decisions that struck down segregation (Brown, among others) and struck down marriage inequality (Obergefell) both relied on the 14th Amendment protections, demonstrating that your statement is not true that the two situations are "nothing like" each other.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

On the contrary, this comment is definitely about opposing same-sex marriage, which is not the same as being "anti-gay."

...to me, that seems like more of a dog-whistle/word-game tactic that gets played by some folks in the evangelical community by promoting policies that directly and negatively impact the gay community, but still wanting to claim "we're not anti-gay".

Supporting a policy that only impacts (and negatively) <insert group here> is, in an of itself, a reflection of an anti-<insert group here> position.

If that strategy were applied to a variety of other issues/stances, the tactic would be quite transparent to anyone looking at it.


Imagine if someone were to hypothetically say: "I support this policy that forbids any display of multi-branched candelabras during the month of December, people wearing 5-7" small hats on their heads, and any displays of six-pointed stars for religious or ceremonial purposes"

...it'd be painfully obvious that the person was against a particular religious group. Nobody would buy the flimsy reasoning of "I'm not anti-Jewish, I just oppose those 3 things".

 

[durangodawood]

4. No Jews?

You cant please everybody!

 

[GACfan]

It is funny when a Fast food Restaurant is held to a higher standard of religious morality than elected officials.

Apparently these disgruntled conservatives voted for a pastor and not a restaurant. You know, we really shouldn't judge Chick-Fil-A for their behavior because no one is sinless and perfect.

 

[durangodawood]

Maybe they can take their business to a different chicken restaurant.

I hear their chicken "al Pastor" is righteous.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I get it that many of you would like to do something about LGBTQ policy. I strongly doubt chicken will be a successful pathway in helping accomplish that.

 

[GACfan]

So this isn't about anti-Christian hate groups?

It's about Christians once again judging the Christian-ness of other Christians and being disappointed?

I think you make a very good point, Ana.

 

[Danthemailman]

Was a little surprised by this news. Chick-fil-A inside a Las Vegas Casino?

Opening ceremony of the first Chick-fil-A restaurant inside a casino
at the Golden Nugget on Monday, Dec. 2, 2019.

Opening ceremony of the first Chick-fil-A restaurant inside a casino

 

[FireDragon76]

They do nothing of the sort. Especially the Dred Scott ruling. The 14th Amendment has nothing to do with marriage as marriage is a legal institution not a natural right. Supreme Court rulings, which are legal opinions that are legally enforceable, just as the Dred Scott ruling was, do not have any more moral authority than anyone else's opinions. Truth is not a matter of 5 or more out of 9 voting a particular way.

Marriage is indeed widely understood as a human right, for instance, in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I get it that many of you would like to do something about LGBTQ policy. I strongly doubt chicken will be a successful pathway in helping accomplish that.

At it's core, I don't think that "voting with one's dollars" is a completely fruitless strategy. As we've seen, the fact that so many folks objected to Chick-fil-a's association with groups that campaign against gay rights did encourage them to change up their model a bit.

However, I don't think that has a direct impact on policy in terms of the kinds of laws that get passed. There is, however, an indirect impact. If organizations sponsor candidates that are against gay rights, and those organizations start getting less money from places like Chick-fil-a, it will indirectly lessen the funding for those types of candidates, but going about it that way is a "slow moving boat" so to speak and likely won't drastically impact things in a meaningful way in the short run.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Marriage is indeed widely understood as a human right, for instance, in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

<Satire>
Now hang on a sec... how can you consider that to be a viable enumeration of human rights?!?!... it doesn't include anything about owning a bazooka to fight tyranny, half of another amendment that gives me the impression that I can foist my religious views on others...and 8.5 other amendments that I can't seem to remember off the top of my head.
</satire>

 

[Ana the Ist]

I hear their chicken "al Pastor" is righteous.

You're in rare form here....

It's possible that they contracted a rare and dangerous disease from their own product known as "El Pollo Loco". It's known to cause erratic behavior in Christians.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Let this be a lesson to all corporations that you should never cater to Christians because the second you don’t do exactly as they want they will retaliate against you.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

OK people, I have a Chik-fil-A solution!

1. Christians get to eat there Mon, Weds, Sat.
2. Gays get to eat there Tues, Thurs, Sun
3. Chik-fil-A is closed Friday for the Muslims.

Ahem....Chick-fil-A isn't open on Sunday. You aren't "anti-gay" are you? Lol.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Let this be a lesson to all corporations that you should never cater to Christians because the second you don’t do exactly as they want they will retaliate against you.

I see this as a lesson in never catering to progressives because by definition they can never be content with what they have or how things are. Otherwise, they could no longer be "progressive". To compromise with a progressive is like giving a mouse a cookie while it is sliding down the slippery slope. So again I say that if CFA is going to cater to the left, they will not be catering at my events.