Easy, Chick-fil-A prides itself on the Southern Baptist beliefs of its founder and they, even to this day, play a major role in the company (such as it being closed on Sundays). The company has been very vocal in their opposition to same sex marriage and have donated money to groups who oppose it. It has caused a large public outcry and led, in some cases, to protests. I remember reading some news stories about college students trying to ban Chick-fil-A from their campus because of the company's beliefs.
Easy, Chick-fil-A prides itself on the Southern Baptist beliefs of its founder and they, even to this day, play a major role in the company … more(such as it being closed on Sundays). The company has been very vocal in their opposition to same sex marriage and have donated money to groups who oppose it. It has caused a large public outcry and led, in some cases, to protests. I remember reading some news stories about college students trying to ban Chick-fil-A from their campus because of the company's beliefs.
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Honestly, I believe that this thread should be hijacked to speak about this controversial matter, because I don't think that a conversation on food ingredients will last very long.
Easy, Chick-fil-A prides itself on the Southern Baptist beliefs of its founder and they, even to this day, play a major role in the company … more(such as it being closed on Sundays). The company has been very vocal in their opposition to same sex marriage and have donated money to groups who oppose it. It has caused a large public outcry and led, in some cases, to protests. I remember reading some news stories about college students trying to ban Chick-fil-A from their campus because of the company's beliefs.
I'm meaning to say that the information MetalicaRules has given to us is fucking insane and genuinely shocking, and the fact that you can even derail a thread about fucking chicken into a conversation about corrupt human beings and political shit means I've lost all hope for every human being on planet earth.
I'm meaning to say that the information MetalicaRules has given to us is fucking insane and genuinely shocking, and the fact that you can ev… moreen derail a thread about fucking chicken into a conversation about corrupt human beings and political shit means I've lost all hope for every human being on planet earth.
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Honestly, I believe that this thread should be hijacked … moreto speak about this controversial matter, because I don't think that a conversation on food ingredients will last very long.
In case anyone is wondering about their shady donation policies.
Policy changes[edit]
In September 2012, The Civil Rights Agenda (TCRA) announced that Chick-fil-A has "ceased donating to organizations that promote discrimination, specifically against LGBT civil rights". According to the TCRA, Chick-fil-A officials stated in an internal document that they "will treat every person equally, regardless of sexual orientation."[31]
In a letter from Chick-fil-A's Senior Director of Real Estate, the company stated: "The WinShape Foundations is now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas."[32]
According to Chicago Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno, Chick-fil-A has a statement of respect for all sexual orientations in an internal document called Chick-fil-A: Who We Are and has promised that its not-for-profit arm, WinShape, would not contribute money to groups that oppose gay marriage.[33]
According to Focus on the Family website, CitizenLink.com: "Contrary to reports first made by the gay-activist group The Civil Rights Agenda (TCRA) on Tuesday and later picked up by mainstream media outlets, Chick-fil-A and its charitable-giving arm, the WinShape Foundation, did not agree to stop making donations to groups that support the biblical definition of marriage in exchange for being allowed to open a franchise in Chicago."[34]
Former Arkansas Governor and FOX News commentator Mike Huckabee claimed on September 21, 2012 that he had "talked earlier today personally with Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick Fil-A about the new reports that Chick Fil-A had capitulated to demands of the supporters of same sex marriage. This is not true. The company continues to focus on the fair treatment of all of its customers and employees, but to end confusion gave me this statement." The statement provided by Chick-fil-A was posted on Huckabee's website but the company did not respond to requests for comment.[35][36] In March 2014, new tax filings from 2012 showed that Chick-fil-A had stopped funding all but one organization which had been previously criticized by LGBT activists and supporters. The company created a new foundation, the Chick-fil-A Foundation, to fund outside groups. WinShape Foundation's 2012 tax filings showed funding only for its own programs, a Berry College scholarship fund, and Lars WinShape, a home for needy children in Brazil.[2]
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Honestly, I believe that this thread should be hijacked … moreto speak about this controversial matter, because I don't think that a conversation on food ingredients will last very long.
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Yeah I have specifically never eaten there either because of what Metallica said.
I don't recall saying they couldn't. Doesn't stop it from being a problem, and it doesn't stop them from being idiotic religious cretins undeserving of a fucktastically small pittance.
That being said, even it being allowed can be called into question when outright discrimination happens by the company (e.g. turning away customers) as well as when the support of an idea is morally disgusting enough (e.g. the CEO of Apple saying "all black people should be shot dead in the streets" would not, and should not, have his job).
Years. Probably since it opened in 1946. Back in the day they didn't get too much baggage for being the way there are though. More recently, people are finally opening their eyes so Chick-fil-A has been more "exposed."
You should though, their food is delicious. I support gay marriage, but at the end of the day, its their beliefs and they have a right to them, just as I have a right to mine. We can't just go around and say "This person or group doesn't share my beliefs, therefore, I don't want to be around them." That's not very tolerant. I support gay marriage, Chick-fil-A doesn't, but I still go there and buy their food because it's great, I don't let our opposing views get in the way.
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Honestly, I believe that this thread should be hijacked … moreto speak about this controversial matter, because I don't think that a conversation on food ingredients will last very long.
Your loss. I support gay marriage, but I've never had a problem eating there. The company has their opinion and I have mine, but I don't let it get in the way.
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Yeah I have specifically never eaten there either because of what Metallica said.
Some people can separate the company and the ideas, others can't. For example it's not uncommon for people to quote the wonderful works of Kipling, but he was a pretty deplorable person. Mostly depends how strong someone feels about the moral discrepancy, though time removed can play a big role. I for one won't eat there, even if the food is good. Pletty of other fast food joints with equally as tantalizing and unhealthy morsels that don't support something I am against.
Your loss. I support gay marriage, but I've never had a problem eating there. The company has their opinion and I have mine, but I don't let it get in the way.
You should though, their food is delicious. I support gay marriage, but at the end of the day, its their beliefs and they have a right to them, just as I have a right to mine.
So if they supported a charity that supported beheading the Jews, would you still eat there?
We can't just go around and say "This person or group doesn't share my beliefs, therefore, I don't want to be around them."
Sure we can. We do it every single day.
That's not very tolerant.
I'm increasingly convinced there no such thing in any meaningful sense.
You should though, their food is delicious. I support gay marriage, but at the end of the day, its their beliefs and they have a right to th… moreem, just as I have a right to mine. We can't just go around and say "This person or group doesn't share my beliefs, therefore, I don't want to be around them." That's not very tolerant. I support gay marriage, Chick-fil-A doesn't, but I still go there and buy their food because it's great, I don't let our opposing views get in the way.
So if they supported a charity that supported beheading the Jews, would you still eat there?
First off, I would have to question what kind of sick charity would purposely kill people, that doesn't sound very charitable. Secondly, if what they believe is not obviously and blatantly hateful or intolerant, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Supporting the killing of Jews because of their beliefs, is hateful and anti-Semitic. Choosing not to support gay marriage because of one's religious beliefs, is not necessarily homophobic. Now if they outright refused to serve people because of their sexual orientation, then that would be a problem. But they don't, they treat everyone that goes into their restaurant fairly and with good service and provide them a quality product, so I honestly don't care about their religious beliefs, as long as everyone is treated fairly and with respect.
Sure we can. We do it every single day.
And we shouldn't. If we surround ourselves with people who just agree with us, then we never expand our knowledge, nor do we ever hear the opposing argument. How can we come to a reasonable conclusion if we fail to even listen? That's the problem with people on the left, more specifically, people who are overly PC or are SJW's, they are so obstinate in their beliefs, that anyone who doesn't agree with them completely, is bigoted, or racist, or homophobic, blah blah blah. Throwing around these terms doesn't lead to acceptance and less hate, if anything, it creates more hate. We need to be open to views that may even contradict and completely oppose our own, that's how we grow not only as a person, but as a society. I tend to be more conservative, I have friends who are conservative, but I also have friends who are independent, libertarian, liberal, and hell, even some that are socialist. When we choose to shut others out, we become more partisan, which has led to the political standstill we have today in the U.S., neither side is willing to listen to the other because they refuse to compromise.
You should though, their food is delicious. I support gay marriage, but at the end of the day, its their beliefs and they have a right to th… moreem, just as I have a right to mine.
So if they supported a charity that supported beheading the Jews, would you still eat there?
We can't just go around and say "This person or group doesn't share my beliefs, therefore, I don't want to be around them."
Sure we can. We do it every single day.
That's not very tolerant.
I'm increasingly convinced there no such thing in any meaningful sense.
First off, I would have to question what kind of sick charity would purposely kill people, that doesn't sound very charitable.
And you wouldn't have to ask what kind of sick charity would purposefully act to prevent loving people from marrying?
Secondly, if what they believe is not obviously and blatantly hateful or intolerant, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Supporting the killing of Jews because of their beliefs, is hateful and anti-Semitic.
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
Choosing not to support gay marriage because of one's religious beliefs, is not necessarily homophobic.
Choosing not to support the Jews isn't necessarily antisemetic. After all, your beliefs state they are incorrectly following God. (Before, now, and after I'm using "you" in a general sense, not you specifically).
Now if they outright refused to serve people because of their sexual orientation, then that would be a problem.
One is direct, one is indirect, I don't see why both are not problems.
But they don't, they treat everyone that goes into their restaurant fairly and with good service and provide them a quality product, so I honestly don't care about their religious beliefs, as long as everyone is treated fairly and with respect.
They treat them unfairly and disrespectfully behind their backs, just not to their face. So it's okay?
And we shouldn't.
Yes we should.
If we surround ourselves with people who just agree with us, then we never expand our knowledge, nor do we ever hear the opposing argument.
I'm not saying dissent should be destroyed, but we do choose who we support. I have an obligation to not support the KKK nor TYT, because they are both organizations that are antithetical to what I believe.
How can we come to a reasonable conclusion if we fail to even listen?
CFA isn't engaging in conversation.
That's the problem with people on the left, more specifically, people who are overly PC or are SJW's, they are so obstinate in their beliefs, that anyone who doesn't agree with them completely, is bigoted, or racist, or homophobic, blah blah blah.
Agreed. In my eyes the contrivances that these people determine are inexcusable are ridiculous and they should be embarrassed.
Throwing around these terms doesn't lead to acceptance and less hate, if anything, it creates more hate.
Yep. Tolerance is a sham. Anyone trying to be tolerant is just being intolerant of the other side. Tolerance is not, and will never be, an achievable end.
We need to be open to views that may even contradict and completely oppose our own, that's how we grow not only as a person, but as a society.
Cool. So when do we go eat at Alla-fill-A. They donate to ISIS but, hey, their cabombs are to die for.
I tend to be more conservative, I have friends who are conservative, but I also have friends who are independent, libertarian, liberal, and hell, even some that are socialist.
I'm fairly conservative in the sense that changing society rapidly can have devastating consequences, but besides that I'm pretty libertarian/left. I can only see why that's loosely relevant.
When we choose to shut others out, we become more partisan, which has led to the political standstill we have today in the U.S., neither side is willing to listen to the other because they refuse to compromise.
So if they supported a charity that supported beheading the Jews, would you still eat there?
First off, I would have to question wha… moret kind of sick charity would purposely kill people, that doesn't sound very charitable. Secondly, if what they believe is not obviously and blatantly hateful or intolerant, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Supporting the killing of Jews because of their beliefs, is hateful and anti-Semitic. Choosing not to support gay marriage because of one's religious beliefs, is not necessarily homophobic. Now if they outright refused to serve people because of their sexual orientation, then that would be a problem. But they don't, they treat everyone that goes into their restaurant fairly and with good service and provide them a quality product, so I honestly don't care about their religious beliefs, as long as everyone is treated fairly and with respect.
Sure we can. We do it every single day.
An… [view original content]
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
No... it's not. Being against gay marriage does not mean you are against homosexuals. It doesn't mean you hate them. I know it's simple to you folks; "I'd rather not have the traditional sacred bond between a man and a woman be broken." = "I hate gays and they are disgusting."
First off, I would have to question what kind of sick charity would purposely kill people, that doesn't sound very charitable.
And y… moreou wouldn't have to ask what kind of sick charity would purposefully act to prevent loving people from marrying?
Secondly, if what they believe is not obviously and blatantly hateful or intolerant, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Supporting the killing of Jews because of their beliefs, is hateful and anti-Semitic.
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
Choosing not to support gay marriage because of one's religious beliefs, is not necessarily homophobic.
Choosing not to support the Jews isn't necessarily antisemetic. After all, your beliefs state they are incorrectly following God. (Before, now, and after I'm using "you" in a general sense, not you specifically).
Now if they outright refused to serve … [view original content]
No... it's not. Being against gay marriage does not mean you are against homosexuals. It doesn't mean you hate them.
Not against homosexuals, just equal rights for homosexuals. Just like the Jew killing charity isn't against Jews, just their human rights. You don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
It's a semantic word game, and it's annoying.
I know it's simple to you folks; "I'd rather not have the traditional sacred bond between a man and a woman be broken." = "I hate gays and they are disgusting."
No, I'm just saying that I will not support people that actively try to bar homosexuals from having equal rights (if within a reasonable amount of difficulty to do so) because that is a position too antithetical to the moral system I try to abide by.
Traditional marriage is reasonably thought to have been very different than the "one man one woman" brought about by the Abrahamic religions (even different than the one man multiple women in various sects). Additionally, fuck tradition. Any person with a lick of sense sees "tradition" as the sink hole excuse that it is. So not only is that argument not a steaming load because its very premise is likely false, but it's also a steaming load because it's tantamount to "we done did it so it's morally good and any alternative should not be allowed."
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
No... it's not. Being against… more gay marriage does not mean you are against homosexuals. It doesn't mean you hate them. I know it's simple to you folks; "I'd rather not have the traditional sacred bond between a man and a woman be broken." = "I hate gays and they are disgusting."
Comments
How exactly can you drag religion and politics into a Chick-fil-A thread?
Easy, Chick-fil-A prides itself on the Southern Baptist beliefs of its founder and they, even to this day, play a major role in the company (such as it being closed on Sundays). The company has been very vocal in their opposition to same sex marriage and have donated money to groups who oppose it. It has caused a large public outcry and led, in some cases, to protests. I remember reading some news stories about college students trying to ban Chick-fil-A from their campus because of the company's beliefs.
Jesus christ.
I am not an American, but I will make sure to never it in Chick-fil-A when I go.
Honestly, I believe that this thread should be hijacked to speak about this controversial matter, because I don't think that a conversation on food ingredients will last very long.
What are you meaning to say?
I'm meaning to say that the information MetalicaRules has given to us is fucking insane and genuinely shocking, and the fact that you can even derail a thread about fucking chicken into a conversation about corrupt human beings and political shit means I've lost all hope for every human being on planet earth.
Is what @MetallicaRules is saying false, Clemy?
Should your nickname be Clemy?
Yes they are pretty bad about knocking the LGBT community....which is too bad...I actually liked eating there.
No, I never even said that it was false. I said it was crazy that what he said was the case.
I thought it was Chicfila....
what
There's always Zaxby's.
A fantastic chicken place with more options other than bland sandwiches and not run by politically backward homophobes.
Nope it is and was real, its crazy to think something like that could lead to something like this, but it did.
The Mandela Effect strikes again.
I actually thought it was Chick-a-Fil.
In case anyone is wondering about their shady donation policies.
Policy changes[edit]
In September 2012, The Civil Rights Agenda (TCRA) announced that Chick-fil-A has "ceased donating to organizations that promote discrimination, specifically against LGBT civil rights". According to the TCRA, Chick-fil-A officials stated in an internal document that they "will treat every person equally, regardless of sexual orientation."[31]
In a letter from Chick-fil-A's Senior Director of Real Estate, the company stated: "The WinShape Foundations is now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas."[32]
According to Chicago Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno, Chick-fil-A has a statement of respect for all sexual orientations in an internal document called Chick-fil-A: Who We Are and has promised that its not-for-profit arm, WinShape, would not contribute money to groups that oppose gay marriage.[33]
According to Focus on the Family website, CitizenLink.com: "Contrary to reports first made by the gay-activist group The Civil Rights Agenda (TCRA) on Tuesday and later picked up by mainstream media outlets, Chick-fil-A and its charitable-giving arm, the WinShape Foundation, did not agree to stop making donations to groups that support the biblical definition of marriage in exchange for being allowed to open a franchise in Chicago."[34]
Former Arkansas Governor and FOX News commentator Mike Huckabee claimed on September 21, 2012 that he had "talked earlier today personally with Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick Fil-A about the new reports that Chick Fil-A had capitulated to demands of the supporters of same sex marriage. This is not true. The company continues to focus on the fair treatment of all of its customers and employees, but to end confusion gave me this statement." The statement provided by Chick-fil-A was posted on Huckabee's website but the company did not respond to requests for comment.[35][36] In March 2014, new tax filings from 2012 showed that Chick-fil-A had stopped funding all but one organization which had been previously criticized by LGBT activists and supporters. The company created a new foundation, the Chick-fil-A Foundation, to fund outside groups. WinShape Foundation's 2012 tax filings showed funding only for its own programs, a Berry College scholarship fund, and Lars WinShape, a home for needy children in Brazil.[2]
I've seen the Chick-Fil-A logo a few times years ago and I really remember it as Chic-Fil-A. I even told my mom that it's spelt wrong.
I freaking stan the Mandela Effect since it creeps me so much that I love it.
Homophobic twats.
Yeah I have specifically never eaten there either because of what Metallica said.
Being homophobic is different to being republican or religious.
How long have these donations been going on?
I don't recall saying they couldn't. Doesn't stop it from being a problem, and it doesn't stop them from being idiotic religious cretins undeserving of a fucktastically small pittance.
That being said, even it being allowed can be called into question when outright discrimination happens by the company (e.g. turning away customers) as well as when the support of an idea is morally disgusting enough (e.g. the CEO of Apple saying "all black people should be shot dead in the streets" would not, and should not, have his job).
Years. Probably since it opened in 1946. Back in the day they didn't get too much baggage for being the way there are though. More recently, people are finally opening their eyes so Chick-fil-A has been more "exposed."
Republican/Religious and Homophobic
My local CFA's employees are mostly older, middle aged people, and they are some of the sweetest people I've ever met.
There's this one older guy who WEARS A WAFFLE FRY TIE AND IT IS SO CUTE.
You don't think there's any relationship between homophobicity and religiousity?
EDIT: Unless you're saying the comparison is poor?
I love their food. Nice chicken, fries, and I love their milkshakes.
That's all I can say XD
Probably more your second statement.
How do you cross a sentence off like that?
Like this?
You should though, their food is delicious. I support gay marriage, but at the end of the day, its their beliefs and they have a right to them, just as I have a right to mine. We can't just go around and say "This person or group doesn't share my beliefs, therefore, I don't want to be around them." That's not very tolerant. I support gay marriage, Chick-fil-A doesn't, but I still go there and buy their food because it's great, I don't let our opposing views get in the way.
Your loss. I support gay marriage, but I've never had a problem eating there. The company has their opinion and I have mine, but I don't let it get in the way.
Thank you, someone gets it.
Some people can separate the company and the ideas, others can't. For example it's not uncommon for people to quote the wonderful works of Kipling, but he was a pretty deplorable person. Mostly depends how strong someone feels about the moral discrepancy, though time removed can play a big role. I for one won't eat there, even if the food is good. Pletty of other fast food joints with equally as tantalizing and unhealthy morsels that don't support something I am against.
So if they supported a charity that supported beheading the Jews, would you still eat there?
Sure we can. We do it every single day.
I'm increasingly convinced there no such thing in any meaningful sense.
Or someone doesn't. Perspective lol.
First off, I would have to question what kind of sick charity would purposely kill people, that doesn't sound very charitable. Secondly, if what they believe is not obviously and blatantly hateful or intolerant, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Supporting the killing of Jews because of their beliefs, is hateful and anti-Semitic. Choosing not to support gay marriage because of one's religious beliefs, is not necessarily homophobic. Now if they outright refused to serve people because of their sexual orientation, then that would be a problem. But they don't, they treat everyone that goes into their restaurant fairly and with good service and provide them a quality product, so I honestly don't care about their religious beliefs, as long as everyone is treated fairly and with respect.
And we shouldn't. If we surround ourselves with people who just agree with us, then we never expand our knowledge, nor do we ever hear the opposing argument. How can we come to a reasonable conclusion if we fail to even listen? That's the problem with people on the left, more specifically, people who are overly PC or are SJW's, they are so obstinate in their beliefs, that anyone who doesn't agree with them completely, is bigoted, or racist, or homophobic, blah blah blah. Throwing around these terms doesn't lead to acceptance and less hate, if anything, it creates more hate. We need to be open to views that may even contradict and completely oppose our own, that's how we grow not only as a person, but as a society. I tend to be more conservative, I have friends who are conservative, but I also have friends who are independent, libertarian, liberal, and hell, even some that are socialist. When we choose to shut others out, we become more partisan, which has led to the political standstill we have today in the U.S., neither side is willing to listen to the other because they refuse to compromise.
The company is corrupt and prejudice. But the food is good.
All I really have to say.
And you wouldn't have to ask what kind of sick charity would purposefully act to prevent loving people from marrying?
Supporting the ability to deny people marriage because of your beliefs is hateful and anti-homosexual.
Choosing not to support the Jews isn't necessarily antisemetic. After all, your beliefs state they are incorrectly following God. (Before, now, and after I'm using "you" in a general sense, not you specifically).
One is direct, one is indirect, I don't see why both are not problems.
They treat them unfairly and disrespectfully behind their backs, just not to their face. So it's okay?
Yes we should.
I'm not saying dissent should be destroyed, but we do choose who we support. I have an obligation to not support the KKK nor TYT, because they are both organizations that are antithetical to what I believe.
CFA isn't engaging in conversation.
Agreed. In my eyes the contrivances that these people determine are inexcusable are ridiculous and they should be embarrassed.
Yep. Tolerance is a sham. Anyone trying to be tolerant is just being intolerant of the other side. Tolerance is not, and will never be, an achievable end.
Cool. So when do we go eat at Alla-fill-A. They donate to ISIS but, hey, their cabombs are to die for.
I'm fairly conservative in the sense that changing society rapidly can have devastating consequences, but besides that I'm pretty libertarian/left. I can only see why that's loosely relevant.
We all have lines.
No... it's not. Being against gay marriage does not mean you are against homosexuals. It doesn't mean you hate them. I know it's simple to you folks; "I'd rather not have the traditional sacred bond between a man and a woman be broken." = "I hate gays and they are disgusting."
Not against homosexuals, just equal rights for homosexuals. Just like the Jew killing charity isn't against Jews, just their human rights. You don't need to hate the Jews to want them to not have equal rights to you.
It's a semantic word game, and it's annoying.
No, I'm just saying that I will not support people that actively try to bar homosexuals from having equal rights (if within a reasonable amount of difficulty to do so) because that is a position too antithetical to the moral system I try to abide by.
Traditional marriage is reasonably thought to have been very different than the "one man one woman" brought about by the Abrahamic religions (even different than the one man multiple women in various sects). Additionally, fuck tradition. Any person with a lick of sense sees "tradition" as the sink hole excuse that it is. So not only is that argument not a steaming load because its very premise is likely false, but it's also a steaming load because it's tantamount to "we done did it so it's morally good and any alternative should not be allowed."