Mercury Fred
Banned
trashy
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
CFA response to anti-gay alleg. "Guilty as charged." Do NOT gloat about eating at CFA
- Thread starter RBH
- Start date
- Status
trashy
Count Dookkake
Member
What would it change? Are you joking? Have you not read the thread?
The company would stop funding odious organizations.
And no, the economy would not be affected. Someone else will pick up the slack.
Also, it's not like they're gonna go out of business overnight, lol.
Keru_Shiri
Member
It's like we go through the same argument, page after page.
I don't think I'm being overly sentimental when I boycott companies who contribute to organizations that are against who I am. God forbid I get offended by a company that believes I shouldn't have equal rights.
If i know one thing about Chicago from living my entire life here, if goverment doesn't want you here, you aren't getting in. Walmart had to spend a ton of money to grease Chicago into allowing them a store in the city of Chicago, and that was with Daley wanting them to open; Rahm doesn't want them here, they aren't coming here.
Chik-Fil-A has one store in Chicago; you won't be seeing more for a long time.
DR2K
Banned
Just sounds like someone throwing a tantrum for being a bigot to me. Bew hew.
Technically you're taking money away from them.
They already have a CFA in Chicago this second location has been planned for a while and now since Dan Cathy made his views public the alderman came forward and said that he would block CFA because of the views of Dan Cathy. Then the mayor came forward and said there were other reasons to block them from opening up business.
TheChocolateWar
Member
When these organizations do not have any real power in the political structure why does it matter that money is going to them from private companies? If the ultimate goals are being achieved; IE yay more gay rights, why do you care that someone who dislikes gay rights gets money or not? Practically speaking, nothing bad is happening.
Is this for real? By purchasing their products you are indirectly contributing to hate groups. It's as simple as that.
GoingGreen
Banned
Because blocking someone's equality and human rights IS WRONG!
freenudemacusers
Member
... Yeah....
TheChocolateWar
Member
Oh no, I am supporting free speech. How horrible. I don't see the issue. Especially when I am also logging in 20+ hours a week with local gay rights advocacy groups and getting actual things done. I don't see how giving money to politically neutered organizations should make me feel guilty about having a grilled chicken sandwich.
I may be concerned if Chick-Fil-A were;
A) Denying service to the effected group.
B) The companies they were giving money to were denying service.
C) The companies they were giving money to were making real change in the political structure.
If my money is just going to a bunch of crotchety old men complaining about the state of the world, so what?
Count Dookkake
Member
Use them in good conscience. Bleed the beast.
After they give you the food, inform them of your stance and thank them for the free grub.
el retorno
Member
And you're money is going to fighting yourself. And make you're job harder.
I'm moving someplace soon that doesn't have them so it won't be hard to avoid.
Why can't they just be like in-n-out and just print bible verses and let that be it.
Count Dookkake
Member
It's like eating donuts on a treadmill.
TheChocolateWar
Member
Its more about calories in/calories out/macros anyway. A doughnut on a treadmill in and of itself is an empty gesture. Just as is giving money to politically neutered organizations who are against what I believe in. The equation would change if I were eating too many calories AND a doughnut/the company who was getting my money was making a real difference.
Count Dookkake
Member
Blah blah blah.
Fair enough; I don't think that the groups Chick-Fil-A has donated to are going to be particularly effective lobbying for their cause, but they've done harm outside of the political spectrum. Chick-Fil-A gave money to Exodus International, one of the largest and most prominent ex-gay organizations in the world. This is a group that would have gay people believe that they're sinful and can repress their desires. This is a group that would like gay people to feel disgusting and perverse, and it's made me feel disgusting and perverse. There's something horrifically ironic about giving money to a company that then turns around and gives donations to organizations that hate me.
freenudemacusers
Member
Wait, you really think FRC and focus on the family have no political or social influence? Not sure if serious, dude.
el retorno
Member
He's trying to justify his continued patronage of the chain.
California Prop 8 won 52% to 48%. How do you think campaigns like that are funded... by religious people's hopes and prayers?
I'm not quite sure why you would do business with a company that funds the exact opposite of the advocacy group you work with. Oh wait I do know, you're trying to justify your love of chicken sandwiches.
flippymittens
Banned
Keru_Shiri
Member
Earlier on this very page people have posted links showing it's more than just old men bitching.
I find this more insidious. They'll happily take money from gays, then turn around and donate money to organizations that work actively against them.
TheChocolateWar
Member
And Prop 8 was; guess what, struck down! As a law student, my calculus for these types of things are different. I see an increase in gay rights as an inevitability. I am not saying that the organizations that Chick-Fil-A donate to have no political power. However, that political power is neutered. In other words, it won't have any actual impact on what is going to eventually happen; a sweeping reform on civil rights within a few years time. I'm fine with enjoying some home fries while I wait for that inevitability. Even if those home fries are made by people who disagree with me.
Omegasquash
Member
Flawless Victory.
That shit is free, you're not giving them any money. Eat up, on their tab.
Wait a minute, you're against discrimination but you support companies that discriminate?
*mindisfulloffuck.jpg*
el retorno
Member
And you know gay people have been prevented from marring in California since the Prop 8 even with the rulings? That wouldn't have happened if Prop 8 had failed.
I mean they can wait years for the judicial system to maybe work if I get my chicken.
Acerac
Banned
I wonder how many people expressing similar opinions in this thread have been juniors.
Contradicting ones self for a fucking chicken sandwich. Never change, America.
No need to bring arbitrary things into the mix. The ability to make a decent argument has nothing to do with how long you've been on GAF.
You can't show tolerance towards someone that you hold a prejudiced belief towards because that is a direct result of you failing to make a fair assessment of them. Any conclusions or actions that follow don't change this so long as the person holds this belief true.
Their answer to the question of gay rights or marriage is not indicative of their tolerance to the people it would impact by necessity anyway; it could be only a receipt of their opinions in regards to the government's powers in general.
They donate to organizations that spread lies and negative attitudes toward gay people period. There also against abortion and they're anti-sexual health, unsurprisingly. You've been to the FRC website, right?
It's really not just about civil rights and it's not just about the marriage issue.
Acerac
Banned
No need to, but as somebody who has been following this thread since the first page it seems that a LOT of juniors feel the same way.
It could just be a coincidence of course.
Prop 8 was struck down? Oh wait no it hasn't. It's in the process of being repealed, but the law is still in effect. You might want to tell all the gay couples that haven't been able to wed since NOVEMBER 2008 that it's been struck down.
You also completely changed the topic, since you said that those organizations have no power when I just gave you an example of one.
How are civil rights inevitable? Did you just trivialize every single person who worked for the rights of African Americans earlier last century? And you should probably go back in time and let them know that boycotts are useless.
You should tell all the minorities in America who are waiting to be treated equal in this country that you have no problem waiting for everything to work itself out while funding the people holding them down because you really like a specific brand of french fries and sandwiches.
TheChocolateWar
Member
I have a little more faith in the judicial system it would seem. If I felt that things were not going to get resolved, I might be a bit more apprehensive about selling my pride for a chicken sandwich.
It was struck down at the circuit court level and is currently on appeal...
Count Dookkake
Member
At least you admitted it. If you survive to member status, this would be a great tag.
el retorno
Member
Your money spent at Chick-fil-a. HAS HURT PEOPLE. As evidenence in Prop 8 they had the right to marry which was taken away because of the organizations that they fund. They had the rights and they were taken away.
And there are stays preventing people from marrying. And what if the SotUS keeps it?
How do you justify 20+ hours a week working with gay rights advocacy groups when you don't think political organizations have any effect on anything?
TheChocolateWar
Member
Yes, and had this been a serious issue right when prop 8 was enacted I would have refrained from Chick-Fil-A. However, the damage is done and the case is working its way through the court system. My further support of Chick-Fil-A is unlikely to make any impact on the court decision unless some unscrupulous lawyer breaks the MRPC.
If ScotUS keeps it? I'll start eating Church's.
Acerac
Banned
Gays will get rights eventually. You gotta order these things in importance.
Delicious chicken that funds discrimination is very important, the rights of minorities will be gotten to eventually.
This thread's been moving fast, but they were posted ten or so pages ago.
Acerac
Banned
Read the first few pages of the thread, he might be part of the majority!
Because California is the only state in the USA, right? Pack up your bags everyone, fight's over!
Newsflash: California is one of the bluest states in the US. What does that say about the state of gay rights in America when gay people still can't get married there?
This has to be a joke.
el retorno
Member
North Carolina just had a ballot question on it. States are still passing laws. You're working for a gay-advocacy group and you think prop-8 is it, they win that gay rights is over?
TheChocolateWar
Member
Luckily, the Supreme Court ruling has that whole "binding on all states" aspect to it. My stance relies in my faith in the Supreme Court and their expansion of current case law. If that case fails, it will be a sad day and I will have to start eating other chicken sandwiches.
el retorno
Member
Do you know that the supreme court doesn't even have to hear it? And the 9th circut's ruling only affects California? What about discrimination laws, adoption, etc.
TheChocolateWar
Member
The likelihood of the Supreme Court denying to hear this case is pretty low. If the Supreme Court declines to hear the case, I will also eat crow. But again, my stance relies on the Supreme Court taking the case.
As per your second point;
All of those will be effected by the decision. Were this court case to be heard, it will center around the old definition of 'protected peoples'. In other words, the classifications of peoples that are granted superior protections of the law in order to warrant higher judicial scrutiny of legislation. A striking down of this marriage law will rewrite the definition of protected peoples. It will include sexual orientation. This will outcrop to all legislation concerning this classification of peoples. In other words, the ruling would impact not only marriage law, but also adoption and other civil rights. This one case has the potential to instigate a sweeping change on ALL laws related to the LGBT community.
- Status