Chick-Fil-A Says It Plans to Stop Giving Donations to Anti-Gay Groups: Beautiful or Being Bullied?

by AdriHead Posted 2012/09/20 19:00:00

Related Topics: Chick-fil-a, Food, Chicken, Gay Marriage, Civil Rights

1,563 votes
Read all 2,478 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Beautiful	624 votes	40%
	Being Bullied	939 votes	60%

Chick-Fil-A dealt with a storm of bad press a short while ago because of a statement by Dan Cathy, the president of the fast-food chain, saying he was "guilty as charged" when asked about his opposition to gay marriage. His comments, along with Chick-Fil-A's monetary donations to anti-gay organizations, led to a media frenzy.

But times have changed. Now, a Chick-Fil-A executive has confirmed that the chicken-loving, fast-food chain will stop donating to such anti-gay groups like Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, according to The Civil Rights Agenda. Do you think this news is a great step for the fast-food company? Or do you feel that Chick-Fil-A was bullied into making this decision?

NYDAILYNEWS.COM reports:
Chick-Fil-A had plenty of support for its anti-gay-marriage stance, but in the end, the restaurant chain chickened out.

nydailynews reports chick-fil-a plenty support anti-gay-marriage stance restaurant chain chickened

+44

Add a comment above

American Nate 2012/09/20 20:43:06

Beautiful

+54
I still don't eat there. I don't like their food either way.

>> See Replies

More polls by AdriHead

Mr. Won... to Turings... 2012/09/25 18:53:35

It isn't a sin. The point that zooms over your head. Actually read the orignal transcripts of ancient Hebrew documents and learn the truth. All the so-called great religions have lied to gullible fools like you.

reply
Turings... to Mr. Won... 2012/09/25 19:03:25

+1
Read what I said again. I said it was what they BELIEVED. That doesn't change your responsibility to inform them of their error.

reply
Mr. Won... to Turings... 2012/09/26 14:40:29
Turings... to Mr. Won... 2012/09/26 17:59:48

Perhaps you weren't paying attention when two City Officials DID try to butt in using the power of government to interfere with Chick Fil A's ability to do business in 'their' cities. THAT was what started this fracas in the first place. Where was your high and mighty Free Speech for EVERYONE when THAT happened? Hmmmmmmm?????

reply
Magus BN-0 2012/09/24 03:04:44

Beautiful

+2
Actually, neither. It's a sham. They're not giving money directly to anti-gay groups, but they're holding fundraisers for the same groups.
http://www.advocate.com/busin...

reply
Depsycho 2012/09/24 02:53:10

Beautiful

+6
BULLIED???

Darlings, are you mad??

ANYTHING that helps to stop funding to those MONSTERS that are anti-gay groups and gets them shriveled up back into non-existence faster IS BEAUTIFUL.

reply
WBC_Sux to Depsycho 2012/09/24 03:09:38

+5

reply
Depsycho to WBC_Sux 2012/09/24 03:18:21

+6
You're telling me. When will they just come clean and say their goal was world domination ever since Christianity was founded?

reply
WBC_Sux to Depsycho 2012/09/24 03:28:01

+2
Sounds about as useful to me as Scientology...

reply
Depsycho to WBC_Sux 2012/09/24 03:49:57

+2
Indeed. Although I personally refuse to acknowledge Scientology as a religion.

reply
WBC_Sux to Depsycho 2012/09/24 03:52:20 (edited)
raine1200 to Depsycho 2012/09/24 13:36:40

Oh? I don't even know what the religion is relying upon

reply
Steve ☮... to Depsycho 2012/09/24 14:25:53

+1
So just to be clear, as nutty as you point out Christianity to be (which I agree with you on), you acknowledge it as a religion but refuse to accept Scientology as one? Why? I am truly curious.

reply
Incognito to Steve ☮... 2012/09/24 18:42:29

reply
Depsycho to Steve ☮... 2012/09/24 22:34:08

+1
Because it's a joke to me. To go into a little more detail, it comes off as a religion that tried to be different, but is essentially the same thing as its mother Christianity, just with a different name and slightly altered beliefs.

I'm sure there are significant differences, but from what I've read on it, it doesn't exactly have a significance as a religion as others do. It wasn't even taught in studies of religions back in high school, and I didn't even hear about it until about a year ago.

reply
WBC_Sux to Steve ☮... 2012/09/25 03:31:08 (edited)

+1
I honestly don't care if a religion is 60 years old, or 6000... Galactic Overlords, Jewish Zombies... it's like arguing over who's a "legit" time traveler... Dr. Who or Doc Brown from Back to The Future... Or who's a "legit" sentient car, Herby The Love Bug or KITT from Knight Rider.

reply
Incognito to Depsycho 2012/09/24 18:38:50

reply
Incognito to WBC_Sux 2012/09/24 18:27:43

reply
raine1200 to Depsycho 2012/09/24 13:31:43

+1
Ha Ha very good I have big troubles believing in the stories

reply
Turings... to Depsycho 2012/09/25 18:25:09

+1
Well when you put it that way, of course it's going to look stupid.

reply
Depsycho to Turings... 2012/09/26 10:07:22

I never did say I was Atheist, sweetie. ♥

reply
Turings... to Depsycho 2012/09/26 12:12:00

That wasn't my point, dear.

reply
Turings... to WBC_Sux 2012/09/25 18:23:51

Where's Islam in your chart? Hmmmmm?????

reply
Turings... to Depsycho 2012/09/25 18:20:35

+1
Monsters? MONSTERS are the BIGOTS who won't let others decide what to do with their OWN money. MONSTERS are the Liberals who believe in free speech -- but only if you agree with THEM. MONSTERS are the Hypocrites who want THEIR unnatural beliefs honored, but no one else's. Oh, and Lt. Riker KNOWS now what happens when you try to encourage a dysfunctional lifestyle in a community that sees that lifestyle as a disease.

reply
Depsycho to Turings... 2012/09/26 10:06:35

*eyeroll*

So then by your logic, an anti-gay organization, focused on suppressing the rights of a class of people just because of sexual preference, is OKAY, but a peaceful protest to stop this unfairness from happening ISN'T??

We're on our way to a peaceful and more tolerant country, and it's bigots in the anti-gay cults that are merely a nuisance that will eventually shrivel up and disappear with enough time so everyone else can move on with their lives. And judging by how far we've come, we're almost there.

reply
Eric Haddix 2012/09/24 02:45:17 (edited)

Being Bullied

+3
Okay, let me get this straight: LGBT activists are celebrating this news because they believe that they have successfully held the powers that be at Chick-Fil-A accountable for their hate speech.

This does not add up. Let's walk through this again.

(1) The powers that be at Chick-Fil-A use their right to free speech for certain speech. Check.
(2) LGBT activists use their right to free speech to express disagreement with the powers that be at Chick-Fil-A’s speech. Check.

So far, so good. Everyone is using their right to speak freely under the Constitution’s 1st Amendment.

Ah, wait, here’s the problem: (3) LGBT activists suddenly felt a need to go beyond disagreeing with the powers that be at Chick-Fil-A’s speech and *start holding them accountable for their speech.*

Sorry, LGBT activists, but free speech, by definition, must be free in order to be free speech. And the idea that bad speech—which alone is a subjective concept to a certain extent—should be punished contradicts how free speech, by definition, works.

And the harder you applaud what happened (like the poster above me does), the more you prove my point. :-)

Okay, let me get this straight: LGBT activists are celebrating this news because they believe that they have successfully held the powers that be at Chick-Fil-A accountable for their hate speech.

This does not add up. Let's walk through this again.

(1) The powers that be at Chick-Fil-A use their right to free speech for certain speech. Check.
(2) LGBT activists use their right to free speech to express disagreement with the powers that be at Chick-Fil-A’s speech. Check.

So far, so good. Everyone is using their right to speak freely under the Constitution’s 1st Amendment.

Ah, wait, here’s the problem: (3) LGBT activists suddenly felt a need to go beyond disagreeing with the powers that be at Chick-Fil-A’s speech and *start holding them accountable for their speech.*

Sorry, LGBT activists, but free speech, by definition, must be free in order to be free speech. And the idea that bad speech—which alone is a subjective concept to a certain extent—should be punished contradicts how free speech, by definition, works.

And the harder you applaud what happened (like the poster above me does), the more you prove my point. :-)

(more)

reply
joseph ... to Eric Ha... 2012/09/24 13:57:09

+1
To put it simply, I , as a gay man, am just suppose to STFU and allow a BUSINESS to override my constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of speech and the right to protest discrimination? Think again.

reply
Koma to joseph ... 2012/09/24 17:11:14

+1
The warped liberal mindset is so skewed it can't begin to see the error of it's way.

You claim to want equal rights when you really want special rights above and beyond all others.

Does your "guaranteed rights to freedom of speech" trump all others including Dan Cathy's?

Only a fool would think so.

reply
WBC_Sux to Koma 2012/09/25 04:02:30 (edited)
Eric Ha... to joseph ... 2012/09/24 19:40:30 (edited)

+1
joseph digristina said: "I , [sic] as a gay man, am just suppose to STFU and allow a BUSINESS to override my constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of speech and the right to protest discrimination?"

reply
joseph ... to Eric Ha... 2012/09/24 20:08:00

Piss off !

reply
WBC_Sux to joseph ... 2012/09/25 05:12:06 (edited)
Turings... to WBC_Sux 2012/09/25 18:34:35

+1
God created man in perfection. Man chose to sin. God doesn't get mad at you for BEING gay any more than He gets mad at me for BEING overweight. Sin is sin, and ALL sin must be repented of. I don't LIKE being fat. I don't LIKE overeating. Nevertheless, it happens, but I wish it wouldn't, and I try to do better in future. I do not revel in my sin. I ask for forgiveness. Can gays make the same claim? If so, God has no problem with them. Sin is sin. But salvation is a free gift to ALL who would accept it.

reply
WBC_Sux to Turings... 2012/09/26 07:30:43 (edited)
TexasMentor54 2012/09/24 01:26:11

Beautiful

+2
Not that they will get my business either way.

reply
raine1200 to TexasMe... 2012/09/24 13:38:38

it is not an issue for me as I have never seen a chickf in Maine. We celebrate seafood not chickens

reply
cutie tee 2012/09/24 01:12:42

Being Bullied

+1
That' not right at all!!!!! they didn't have a problem before wow messed up!

reply
silentart 2012/09/23 22:07:13

Being Bullied

No one gain anything by boycott business... Best policy is if you do not like their viewpoint, then do not patronize that business. Boycott usually bring violence and cost us, taxpayers, with police control and court processing and medical expense and etc.

reply
LucidLoon to silentart 2012/09/23 22:29:11

+3
Not patronizing a business whose viewpoint you don't like is essentially a boycott.

reply
silentart to LucidLoon 2012/09/25 05:39:04

Boycott is akind of blocking entry to business. Then business owner have rigts to call police to clear up blockage. Suppose bocott group refuse to clear pathway to business then police has rights to arrest... What will happen next? one little stubborn lead into big action Then taxes come in picture with overtime of enforcement officer , appearance in jail and appearance in court... Eating up tax that could had go other better way to improvement of living condition in cities.

reply