Skip

Appreciation
August 2, 2012 11:13 AM   Subscribe

Chick-fil-A 'appreciation' day: Frenzied sales set record. 'Chick-fil-A appears to have set a company record in sales on Wednesday, a day on which Americans were encouraged to show their support for the fast-food restaurant' by former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. 'Orange County Pastor Rick Warren tweeted a snippet of a conversation he'd had with Dan Cathy, president of the popular fast-food chain', celebrating the record setting day.

Mike Huckabee sees the success of the campaign as a sign that people are tired of "intolerance and bigotry toward Christians".

Steve Robinson, executive vice president of marketing for Chick-fil-A, said the company was "grateful and humbled by the incredible turnout of loyal Chick-fil-A customers". 'Customers often waited in long lines, many weathering the blistering summer sun, just to get in the front door' as they 'showed up at outlets in droves coast-to-coast.'

'Such images -- as well as those of crowded Chick-fil-A counters and long lines of cars snaking through the drive-thru lanes -- created a social media frenzy on Wednesday as they were shared and reshared on a variety of platforms, including Twitter.'
posted by VikingSword (649 comments total) 15 users marked this as a favorite

 
Facebooktivism.
posted by rhythim at 11:14 AM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


What's that saying about fools and their money?
posted by CyberSlug Labs at 11:15 AM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


Why the fuck is a goofy fried chicken joint the locus of the most popular culture war this year?

Don't bother answering that.
posted by Burhanistan at 11:16 AM on August 2, 2012 [43 favorites]



Is this restaurant even any good? Or is it just typical fast food chicken fare?
posted by Jalliah at 11:17 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


Could we go back to the form of slacktivism where all we had to do was change our Facebook profile picture to a cartoon character? I don't want to feel obligated to go eat at the LGBT-friendly restaurant next week.
posted by sacrifix at 11:17 AM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


Maybe the way to go here is just to make out with a boyfriend in front of these grease-bombs every day.

You know, as free speech, and because it is fun.

We could do it while legally armed.
posted by poe at 11:17 AM on August 2, 2012 [17 favorites]


I hope that it goes the way of Krispy Kreme.
posted by goethean at 11:17 AM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


Hmmm. In the long run this may not be a good thing for the company. It kinda seals them in the public mind as "the anti-gay chicken place." A lot of people who were probably thinking "eh, who cares what wacky ideas their CEO has" will now feel a little uncomfortable going to eat there. It's made it a "statement" in support of the CEO rather than simply a refusal to take sides.
posted by yoink at 11:18 AM on August 2, 2012 [83 favorites]


Greasy fast food as political statement concerning sexuality.

There is nothing more American than this.
posted by The Whelk at 11:18 AM on August 2, 2012 [218 favorites]


"intolerance and bigotry toward Christians".

Amen, Christians can't even marry in certain states!
posted by Ad hominem at 11:18 AM on August 2, 2012 [211 favorites]


Mike Huckabee sees the success of the campaign as a sign that people are tired of "intolerance and bigotry toward Christians".

Indeed, it is now time to withdraw the prejudiced laws from the books and allow Christians to marry just like everyone else.
posted by DU at 11:18 AM on August 2, 2012 [43 favorites]


I never cease to be impressed at just how mean and spiteful the American populist right wing is. They always, always top themselves.

Honestly, I admire it in a perverse way. Progressives and liberals witness year after year of crushing inequality and unjust gains in the financial sector and only after decades of this do they begin protesting; Mike Huckabee says something on Facebook and every mouth-breather in the country goes and stuffs their face full of chicken. For real, it's kind of amazing.
posted by downing street memo at 11:18 AM on August 2, 2012 [115 favorites]


I love Sarah Palin's quote:

Sarah Palin, who snapped this photo with husband Todd at a Chick-fil-A last week, told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren on Tuesday night that boycotting Chick-fil-A “has a chilling effect on our First Amendment rights” and that the fast food chain is “being harmed by those who are intolerant and are bigoted and are hypocritical.”

“The owner of the Chick-fil-A business had merely voiced his personal opinion about supporting traditional definition of marriage, one boy, one girl, falling in love, getting married,” the former Alaska governor said. “And having voiced support for kind of that cornerstone of all civilization and all religions since the beginning of time, he then [is] basically getting crucified.”


I would find it difficult to fit more dumb, ignorant misunderstandings into a few sentences than she did.
posted by gagglezoomer at 11:19 AM on August 2, 2012 [145 favorites]


This is my favorite picture from yesterday. Apparently their customers will wait in long lines, weathering the blistering summer sun, etc. etc. but by god they sure as shit are not going to step out of their cars and walk ten feet come hell or high water.
posted by enn at 11:19 AM on August 2, 2012 [41 favorites]


A lot of people who were probably thinking "eh, who cares what wacky ideas their CEO has" will now feel a little uncomfortable going to eat there.

Yeah, I'd be more interested in how their profits do for the next 12-18 months than how they did that day.
posted by DU at 11:19 AM on August 2, 2012 [9 favorites]


You know which chicken chain loves gay people? KFC. (Link slightly NSFW)
posted by ColdChef at 11:20 AM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


So, what to do? Hit up KFC on Sunday?
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:20 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


Stuff those greasy gobs for freedom, America.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:21 AM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


As someone who disagrees vehemently with Chick-Fil-A's owner, I will not be patronizing any of his businesses. But I think that calls by politicians to treat this business differently due to the beliefs of its owner are counterproductive at best, and downright scary at worst. Yes, the Constitution makes those calls unactionable, but I don't really see how this is different from calls to prevent an Islamic Center from being built in Murfreesboro.
posted by Slothrup at 11:22 AM on August 2, 2012 [63 favorites]


Is this restaurant even any good? Or is it just typical fast food chicken fare?

It is very, very good.

Here's the thing: CFA's anti-gay activism is doomed. It is a colossal waste of money; no amount of spending on anti-gay stuff will roll back the tide of progress. It's like being a segregationist in 1980; the battle has already been lost. CFA's spending on anti-gay groups is only possible because the company is private; investors would shut that shit down in a heartbeat.

I feel ambiguous about eating there, but ultimately I say let them waste their money on a cause that's going nowhere.
posted by downing street memo at 11:22 AM on August 2, 2012 [48 favorites]


I want to be angry, but honestly this is just one of the saddest things I've ever seen. People waiting an hour in a drive through to buy a greasy chicken sandwich, just to prove that they're every bit as hateful as the next guy. I don't even know what to say anymore.
posted by crackingdes at 11:22 AM on August 2, 2012 [209 favorites]


I also like how economic sanctions of people against a corporation is "chilling effect on the First Amendment" while economic sanctions of corporations against people (e.g. demanding lowered taxes or we close the plant) is "just business".
posted by DU at 11:23 AM on August 2, 2012 [59 favorites]


I'm amused by the people who still think this is a free speech issue.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:23 AM on August 2, 2012 [23 favorites]


This is my favorite picture from yesterday.

Dollars to Donuts that the majority of the people in that line are trying to pull onto that side street / mall entrance, not eat at Chik-Fil-A.
posted by Debaser626 at 11:23 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


My brother and his boyfriend once got free chick-fil-a because the manager thought their engagement rings were actually purity rings.
posted by hellojed at 11:24 AM on August 2, 2012 [223 favorites]


Mike Huckabee says something on Facebook and every mouth-breather in the country goes and stuffs their face full of chicken. For real, it's kind of amazing.

As a mouth-breather, I'm offended by this statement.
posted by goethean at 11:24 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


Mike Huckabee sees the success of the campaign as a sign that people are tired of "intolerance and bigotry toward Christians".

Maybe. Certainly there is plenty of that type of bigotry, including here on MetaFilter. But I think more of the backlash simply has to do with the statements by mayors Emanuel and Menino, hoping to strongarm the company out of their cities.

I don't know about Chicago, but you don't have to rewind the clock far in Boston to find both a mayor and a governor whose beliefs oppose gay marriage. It would have been terrible if those politicians had tried to stifle a business that supported gay marriage, and the tactic doesn't become any better—or more American, frankly—when it's flipped. The Chick-fil-A "appreciation" was pretty well covered around here by the local news stations, and the recurring theme from participants was Menino, not gay marriage.
posted by cribcage at 11:25 AM on August 2, 2012 [10 favorites]


Chick-fil-a has always pushed its Christian identity, to the point of never being open on Sundays. But I think this is a move that will backfire. You got one day of a bunch of Christians going and eating your fried chicken sandwiches, but alienated a whole swath of potential customers.
posted by graymouser at 11:25 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


My brother and his boyfriend once got free chick-fil-a because the manager thought their engagement rings were actually purity rings.

Well, no one's getting pregnant, right?
posted by griphus at 11:26 AM on August 2, 2012 [35 favorites]


Yes, the Constitution makes those calls unactionable, but I don't really see how this is different from calls to prevent an Islamic Center from being built in Murfreesboro.

Well, one is a call for action against bigotry, the other is a call to action for bigotry.

It's fairly simple.

But that's process liberalism for you: it doesn't matter what your cause is, just that you play nice and don't scare the horses.
posted by MartinWisse at 11:26 AM on August 2, 2012 [35 favorites]


First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, they they fight you, then they just kind of give up on lawmaking as a response to the inexorable tide of history and push battered pieces of bird down their gullets instead
posted by Greg Nog at 11:27 AM on August 2, 2012 [37 favorites]


This is pretty meaningless. Are they going to eat at Chic-Fil-A every day? The danger to the company from the negative publicity has to do with a decrease in the total percentage of the population willing to eat there. For restaurants that can be very dangerous -- they depend on a regular influx of people wanting to eat, and single-day or even short-term increases in business won't make up for a permanent decrease in business.

Even if they manage to socially engineer fundamentalist Christians into going to Chic-Fil-A regularly, it pushes the company away from being a mainstream organization and towards being one of those "Christian version" things.
posted by JHarris at 11:27 AM on August 2, 2012 [11 favorites]


I want to be angry, but honestly this is just one of the saddest things I've ever seen. People waiting an hour in a drive through to buy a greasy chicken sandwich, just to prove that they're every bit as hateful as the next guy. I don't even know what to say anymore.

I'd be careful about assigning strictly anti-gay motives to the people who ate at CFA yesterday. I've read a number of reports interviewing people who made a point of going there yesterday and the main theme seems to be garden-variety ressentiment of all things left-wing. Check this out, from a reporter who covered the protests in Florida, it's very reminiscent of the Tea Parties.

As with anything, we learned yesterday that the right wing is a united front.
posted by downing street memo at 11:28 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


I don't know why so many people are up in arms about this-- the participants are Christians. I think we can assume that all the food purchased went to the poor.
posted by Mayor Curley at 11:28 AM on August 2, 2012 [59 favorites]


Are they going to eat at Chic-Fil-A every day?

Anyone want to start some sort of black flag operation where we convince bigots to eat massive amounts of greasy fried chicken on a daily basis?

IF YOUR CHEST DOESN'T HURT, YOU'RE NOT SUPPORTING AMERICA
posted by griphus at 11:29 AM on August 2, 2012 [93 favorites]


Let's be clear: People are not concerned with CFA's beliefs or statements, so much as they are concerned about their actions. For example, spending $25,000 to lobby Congress not to condemn Uganda's legislation mandating the death penalty for homosexuality.

They are spending money in favor of genocide against homosexuals. That's not hyperbole, that is literally what is going on here.
posted by 0xFCAF at 11:29 AM on August 2, 2012 [256 favorites]


In Nashua, NH, the Christian right flocked to a Chick-fil-A which is helping to sponsor New Hampshire Pride Fest as direct response to all this.
“In both my personal and professional life, I have had and continue to have positive relationships with family, friends, customers and employees in the LGBT community.” [the manager] said. “It would make me sad if someone felt that they were not openly welcomed into my life or restaurant based on their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.
posted by ChuraChura at 11:29 AM on August 2, 2012 [28 favorites]


I, for one, am thankful that Chick-Fil-A is flying their bigotry flag high. It makes it easier for me to spend my money elsewhere.

I'm lucky that my smallish town has multiple local bike shops. One shop has a "Pray to end abortion" sign in it's window. While I was out debating which bike to buy this spring, I pulled into the parking lot of this particular shop, saw the sign, and backed up back into the street and never looked back.

I fully support the rights of that business to have that sign out there. Just like I fully support my right to not spend any of my money there.

Now, if they start refusing to hire people because of their sexuality, that's when I'll get angry.
posted by jillithd at 11:29 AM on August 2, 2012 [29 favorites]




"intolerance and bigotry toward Christians".

I just put my head clean through my desk.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:30 AM on August 2, 2012 [23 favorites]


“And having voiced support for kind of that cornerstone of all civilization and all religions since the beginning of time, he then [is] basically getting crucified.”

Hey, wait, what? You mean what happened to Christ was just that a bunch of people said they didn't want to eat at his fast food restaurant? This IS a radical new interpretation of scripture:

And lo, Pontius Pilate refused to grant Jesus a liquor license for his restaurant chain, the Olive Garden of Gesthemane. "I wash my hands of your whole business model!" said Pilate. "This is an outrageous state interference in private enterprise and an infringement of free speech," said Jesus: "This is worse than when those damned money lenders refused to give me a start-up loan!" Jesus wept (but, you know, in a manly way).
posted by yoink at 11:30 AM on August 2, 2012 [75 favorites]


EAT
MOR
BIGITS
posted by mediated self at 11:30 AM on August 2, 2012 [9 favorites]


i think this is great. i don't agree with the views endorsed by chick-fil-a's ownership, but a campaign to drum up business is exactly as valid as a boycott - they're two sides of the same coin. it's great that there are still non-violent, legal ways to express political differences in this county. buying sandwiches is a far cry from bringing automatic weapons to opposition campaign stops, that's for damn sure.

we need *more* of exactly this type of political "acting out", not less.
posted by facetious at 11:30 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


I'm amused by the people who still think this is a free speech issue.

When the mayor of a city wants to deny a privately owned business a license to operate, solely because of the opinions of some of the company's officers, it's very much a free speech issue, and it should chill you. By god, if as a nation we say that Fred Phelps' speech must be protected, then we damn well better protect the free speech of a backward old restaurant owner who doesn't like "the gays."
posted by jbickers at 11:30 AM on August 2, 2012 [42 favorites]


(I should have prefaced that first article with an apology for how horrible the Union Leader is... and an admonition not to read the comments)
posted by ChuraChura at 11:31 AM on August 2, 2012


I bet major quantities of sperm were unknowingly consumed by many many self-righteous homophobic Christians on Chick-Fil-A Day.
posted by Skygazer at 11:31 AM on August 2, 2012


it's very much a free speech issue, and it should chill you

THAT issue came much later in this whole thing, and the ACLU quickly shut it down.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:31 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


I'm reluctant to engage with this level of "discourse", but I think correct response here would be a Food Bank* Appreciation Day by friends of the LGBT community.**

(*: or soup kitchen, homeless shelter, etc.)
(**: Politicizing charity leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but can we just start being overtly Christ-like in our response to things like this? The answer to hate is love, and all that.)

posted by spanishbombs at 11:31 AM on August 2, 2012 [17 favorites]


"intolerance and bigotry toward Christians"... "And having voiced support for kind of that cornerstone of all civilization and all religions since the beginning of time, he then [is] basically getting crucified."

Shit like this makes me laugh. This is a religion which actually -- literally -- tortured people to death within American colonial history, and now they're crying about "crucifixion" because other people have the temerity to stop eating at their restaurants?

This is nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy: if the Christian right persists in combining a completely unfounded persecution complex with actual persecution of others, one of these days they might just get their wish.
posted by vorfeed at 11:32 AM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


Is this restaurant even any good? Or is it just typical fast food chicken fare?

I ate some Chick-fil-a once when passing through the southland, some years ago. It was okay. Better than, say, a Wendy's Chicken Filet sandwich. In terms of quality and taste I'd say that it was, to fast-food chicken sandwiches, about what Five Guys is to fast-food burgers.

You can, apparently, approximate them at home.
posted by gauche at 11:32 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


Gay Chick-Fil-A Employees speak out - puts another perspective on the whole topic.
posted by graymouser at 11:33 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


I found their chicken really bland. KFC is much better fast food fried chicken. The best fried chicken I've ever had was cooked by Charlie Ayers using the recipe he got from Elvis Presley's cook.
posted by w0mbat at 11:33 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


When I read the first sentence of this post I had to imagine it in 400-point all caps on the front page of the Bawcawk Times, the newspaper for chickens.
posted by furiousthought at 11:33 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


"intolerance and bigotry toward Christians bigots"

FTFY, Huck.
posted by Sys Rq at 11:33 AM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


Man some people really, really, really want to be a persecuted minority but without all that being persecuted or being a minority stuff.
posted by The Whelk at 11:34 AM on August 2, 2012 [142 favorites]


I can't speak for Emmanuel, but Menino has no involvement in the permitting process. He was using his position as mayor to decry Chick-Fil-A's shitty policies, which I am of two minds about, but he was not (and could not) threatening to deny them permits.

As he clarified in a later statement.
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:34 AM on August 2, 2012 [9 favorites]


Sara Palin and Mike Huckabee and all the other "constitutional scholars" conveniently forget the flip side to free speech: If you say stupid shit, people are free to call you out on it. Marketplace of ideas, and all that. Nobody is being persecuted here, regardless of the claims made.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 11:34 AM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


When the mayor of a city wants to deny a privately owned business a license to operate, solely because of the opinions of some of the company's officers, it's very much a free speech issue

A mayor can "want" all kinds of things. The question is whether any mayor has tried to take any actual steps to act on those wants. I'm unaware of any Chick-Fil-A restaurant being denied a license to operate in any city in the country or of any actual procedural steps being taken anywhere to make that happen. If you have contrary information, I'd be interested to see it.
posted by yoink at 11:34 AM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


Nobody is being persecuted here, regardless of the claims made.

Actually, gay teenagers are being persecuted.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:35 AM on August 2, 2012 [34 favorites]


Sarah Palin, who snapped this photo with husband Todd at a Chick-fil-A last week, told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren on Tuesday night that boycotting Chick-fil-A “has a chilling effect on our First Amendment rights” and that the fast food chain is “being harmed by those who are intolerant and are bigoted and are hypocritical.”

...what...what in the world? Intolerant? Bigoted? This is just fascinating. It seems like a certain segment of the right wing has gotten really comfortable with this ideology, in which any attempt to limit their capacity to abuse and ruin the lives of others is bigotry and intolerance against them. It's amazing, this profound sense of entitlement they have. They really seem to believe that denying them the right to be bigoted is, itself, bigotry. Fascinating.
posted by clockzero at 11:35 AM on August 2, 2012 [29 favorites]


Just guessing, but not reported: whether sales were down for the rest of the week because appreciation day cannibalized ... I mean concentrated all the once a week casual visitors into a single day.
posted by zippy at 11:35 AM on August 2, 2012


When the mayor of a city wants to deny a privately owned business a license to operate, solely because of the opinions of some of the company's officers

There is some concern that CFA discriminates against franchise applicants. Refusing to grant a business license to a company that discriminates is certainly within the purview of the mayoral office. It's sad that this keeps getting presented as a free speech issue, when it isn't.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:35 AM on August 2, 2012 [27 favorites]


Need to turn CFA into the go-to gay pick-up location. Until the macho types won't go there anymore 'cause someone might get the wrong idea or they might actually see two guys kiss. Plus, have you heard what goes on in the bathrooms? Until frat boys tease each other about going to CFA, ha ha, what are you, gay? Trying to pick up some dudes, eh, bro?

Then, when they get dependent on the gay dollars, stop going there.
posted by ctmf at 11:35 AM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


KFC Loves Gays (with John Goodman)
posted by zarq at 11:36 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


And it wasn't just the Cathys' public statements and donations Menino was objecting to; it was their discrimination in franchising as well.
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:36 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


So last night, I got into this utterly pointless shouting match on the phone with one of my oldest friends triggered by some inane pronouncement of his on the whole free speech angle on this thing. It eventually devolved to name calling on my part, because, well, he's a complete bigot full of vile stupid bullshit about everything and I was half a bottle of wine in and sometimes I think it's going to feel good to just be like "dude the problem I have here is not located in some highly structured argument about Truth and Biblical Whatever, it's located in how you're an asshole". Of course it doesn't ever actually feel good, and it's probably counterproductive as all hell.

Anyway. I don't know where I was going with this. It feels stupid to be having a big national pissing match about a fast food chicken chain I've never even eaten at, but it also feels like this is one of those times you realize just exactly how many people your own age are going to have to grow old and die before we will ever approach being sane about basic human rights.
posted by brennen at 11:36 AM on August 2, 2012 [25 favorites]


Division. We need more goddamn division like we need extra holes in our collective heads.
posted by Mooski at 11:36 AM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


You can, apparently, approximate them at home.

Waffle fries and Chick-Fil-A sauce, for the complete experience.
posted by mediated self at 11:37 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


Seems, then, the conservative Americans have moved from the Tea Party to the Chicken Shit party...but another example of the huge divide taking place in the nation.
posted by Postroad at 11:37 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]




Luke Adams makes a good observation: Watching the "Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day" in 2012 makes me wonder if there was a "Woolworth Lunch Counter Appreciation Day" in 1960.

The pictures from yesterday are as shameful as people yelling at schoolchildren in Selma.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 11:38 AM on August 2, 2012 [38 favorites]


Yelp reviews.
posted by small_ruminant at 11:38 AM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


Is this restaurant even any good?

Yeah, unfortunately it is really good. I mean, it's just fast food chickens sandwiches, but there are a ton of things that Chick-Fil-A does exactly right.
  • They have good fresh fruit available as a side, as well as carrot salad and cole slaw.
  • They offer a whole wheat bun.
  • They have indoor playscapes.
  • The kids meals come with books or science projects or other (generally) educational things that are of a vastly higher quality than similar things at, say, McDonalds (they had a long-running partnership with the Muppets, and Bernestain Bears).
  • They have wipes, and hand-sanitizer, and clean restrooms, and breath mints.
  • Killer, killer shakes.

    They are truly head and shoulders above any other fast food place. But, now, they've rebranded themselves not as "Christians who do a lot of things right and are closed on Sundays, and that's weird, but hey: they do a lot of things right so I'll eat there sometimes" into "eat here and side with hate" and, basically, fuck that. McDonalds southern chicken sandwich is not quite as good but they aren't active, proud purveyors of hate.

    Seriously. Fuck Chick-Fil-A.

  • posted by dirtdirt at 11:38 AM on August 2, 2012 [35 favorites]


    Sorry- that's actually an article about recent homoerotic yelp reviews of Chick-fil-a.
    posted by small_ruminant at 11:39 AM on August 2, 2012


    "Well.... uh... I hate the Jews!" - White Castle C.E.O. at next press conference
    posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 11:39 AM on August 2, 2012 [24 favorites]


    I feel just as strongly as Menino that Chick-Fil-A is not welcome here, just like any other business that restricts franchise opportunities on the basis of the owners' interpretation of Christian doctrine, and that funds anti-marriage equality initiatives.

    Fortunately for Chick-Fil-A, he and I have the same power to deny their franchisees permits, which is zero.
    posted by Sidhedevil at 11:41 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    So, everyone who declared in the last Chick-fil-A thread that they don't care about the company's bigoted views are, you just want to go eat there without worrying about the politics?

    Take a look around at the company you're keeping. Take a look at who you're giving your money to.
    posted by Reverend John at 11:41 AM on August 2, 2012 [15 favorites]


    The pictures from yesterday are as shameful as people yelling at schoolchildren in Selma.

    Really? I think you're kinda skating over the "yelling at schoolchildren" part of the equation here. I think these people were certainly misguided and many of them hold regrettable and wrongheaded opinions (and some, certainly, are hateful). But there's a pretty yawning divide between, say, going to eat at Chick-Fil-A because you want to support the CEO's position on "traditional marriage" and, say, being Fred Phelps.
    posted by yoink at 11:41 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    Roy Rogers = manifest destiny
    Wendy's = universal sufferage
    ...?
    posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:41 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    "Well.... uh... I hate the Jews!" - White Castle C.E.O. at next press conference

    I recall seeing an article somewhere that the White Castle owners are in the same bigotry boat as these douchebags.
    posted by zombieflanders at 11:41 AM on August 2, 2012




    haters gonna hate.

    well, you know what? we ain't going away. where are they going to be in six months? we're still gonna be here telling networks not to carry your ads and our friends not to eat your food.
    posted by Ironmouth at 11:43 AM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Nancy Pelosi expressed her support KFC over Chick-fil-A via Twitter on Friday, writing, “For the record, I prefer Kentucky Fried Chicken. #ChickFilA”

    By championing KFC, Pelosi is one of the latest politicians to criticize Chick-fil-A for President Dan Cathy’s statements about his support for traditional marriage.

    Unfortunately, her chicken of choice does not necessarily reflect a better progressive world, since KFC has come under recent criticism from environmentalists for destroying the rainforest.

    Bloomberg reported in June that “KFC chicken buckets use wood harvested from Indonesia’s rain forest, destroying the habitat of the endangered Sumatran tiger, Greenpeace International said.”

    According to the Global Forest Watch in Washington, Indonesia has lost about 5 million acres of forest a year to logging since 1996, which is double the rate in the 1980s.
    posted by GrooveJedi at 11:43 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    The free speech bullshit is a complete red herring. This is about treating queer people like whole human beings and first-class citizens, nothing less or more, and how various people and groups are actively working to make gay peoples' lives even more difficult and dangerous than they already are. This is about sticking up for the human and civil rights of our fellow people, not about trying to stop the mouth of some dumb bigot.

    And this also shows very well how incalculably corrosive the Citizens United decision has been to our country. Spending money is not the same as speech, and yet now they're conflated as a matter of course, and nobody even bothers to point out that they're clearly fundamentally distinct and what that means for this situation. This is very disturbing.
    posted by clockzero at 11:43 AM on August 2, 2012 [31 favorites]


    I recall seeing an article somewhere that the White Castle owners are in the same bigotry boat as these douchebags.

    I wouldn't be a bit surprised if dozens of big corporate CEOs are bigots on a lot of issues. But Chick-Fil-A seems to want to have it both ways: the owner wants to use his restaurant as a mouthpiece for his religious and political views and be shielded under "free speech" from any criticism of those views.
    posted by graymouser at 11:44 AM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    yoink, what about a young mother fired for refusing to quit so that she could be a stay at home mother? Where does that fall in your divide?
    posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:44 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]




    I live in Atlanta, near a Chick-fil-A, and I drive past it every day around lunchtime. It's always busy (to the point that I've never eaten lunch there, not because of politics, but because it''s impossible to get a parking space from noon to two), and it didn't seem any busier than usual. I think this might have been more of a thing outside of Atlanta, or at least outside of my neighborhood.
    posted by dortmunder at 11:45 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I wholeheartedly agree with Facetious's comment above that this type of political action—both boycotts and turnouts—is a valid and important part of our culture. But then I read things like this...

    One gay employee who works at Chick-fil-A headquarters in Atlanta, Ga., and asked to remain anonymous for fear of losing his job, says he is getting it from both sides. On the one hand, there is the customer who came in and said he supported Dan Cathy and then "continues to say something truly homophobic, e.g. 'I'm so glad you don't support the queers, I can eat in peace,'" the employee, who is 23 and has worked for Chick-fil-A since he was 16, wrote in an email. On the other hand, he continued, "I was yelled at for being a god-loving, conservative, homophobic Christian while walking some food out to a guest in a mall dining room."

    ...and I'm reminded that the huge, gaping caveat is that the participants need to have the kindness and maturity to be able to shake hands with everybody at the end of the protest, pro or con.

    What a terrible way to treat a person. From both sides.

    Menino has no involvement in the permitting process

    Tell that to Dianne Wilkerson, rimshot.
    posted by cribcage at 11:45 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Until frat boys tease each other about going to CFA, ha ha, what are you, gay? Trying to pick up some dudes, eh, bro?

    ♪ ♫ It's fun to eat at the Chi-ick Fil-A ♪ ♬
    posted by gauche at 11:45 AM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    This just in: Chick-fil-a counter-protest breaks records at YWCA cafeterias.
    posted by zippy at 11:45 AM on August 2, 2012


    Actual letter sent to Chick-Fil-A from 17 members of Congress.

    me: Oh wow, 17 congresspersons got together to shame Chick-Fil-A? Quite surprised by that...

    clicks

    Ah, right.
    posted by SomaSoda at 11:45 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    yoink, what about a young mother fired for refusing to quit so that she could be a stay at home mother? Where does that fall in your divide?

    Um...nowhere? I don't quite see how you think that's relevant to anything I said.
    posted by yoink at 11:46 AM on August 2, 2012




    If all their kid food sponsors pull out, then it'll just be Veggie Tales CDs?
    posted by tilde at 11:47 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    So confused now, is it still ok to choke the chicken? If so, does it have to be your chicken or can it be someone else's chicken? Can you put the chicken in a warmer? For how long?
    posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:48 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Benny Andajetz : Sara Palin and Mike Huckabee and all the other "constitutional scholars" conveniently forget the flip side to free speech: If you say stupid shit, people are free to call you out on it. Marketplace of ideas, and all that. Nobody is being persecuted here, regardless of the claims made.

    You can bet your sweet ass that the exact same people, including Palin and Huckabee, were all about "the marketplace of ideas" when it was the Dixie Chicks being boycotted for apologizing about the President.

    That boycott was a good boycott, you see, while a boycott by liberals is unconscionable, and can't possibly be allowed by the Constitution, which exists to let the religious right do whatever they want, whenever they want.
    posted by Malor at 11:48 AM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    Jefferson Davis felt that those horrible abolitionists were showing a high level of intolerance and bigotry towards plantation owners, also.
    posted by Danf at 11:49 AM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    I'd say that it was, to fast-food chicken sandwiches, about what Five Guys is to fast-food burgers.

    So, shitty but inexplicably praised?
    posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:49 AM on August 2, 2012 [15 favorites]


    This controversy was Ryan Holiday's idea, wasn't it?
    posted by Blue Meanie at 11:49 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Bloomberg reported in June that “KFC chicken buckets use wood harvested from Indonesia’s rain forest, destroying the habitat of the endangered Sumatran tiger, Greenpeace International said.”

    WTF? Buckets are made from wood pulp, and really, any cellulose fiber will do. Another indication of our ridiculously distorted economy if it's more cost effective to log indonesia for chicken buckets than... crap, practically anything. Corn stalks, straw, ditchweed, trash pine, fuck, anything.
    posted by George_Spiggott at 11:50 AM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Tomorrow is the Kiss-In.

    I will be at the Chick-Fil-A near Patton Creek south of Birmingham, AL in the afternoon if anyone wants a smooch. I'll be wearing a black t-shirt from the band The Dwarves that reads "TEACH CHILDREN TO WORSHIP SATAN".

    Stop by!
    posted by BitterOldPunk at 11:51 AM on August 2, 2012 [59 favorites]


    So, shitty but inexplicably praised?

    I'm sorry, you must have read that as "In-N-Out Burger."
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:51 AM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    ""Chik-Fil-A, where you can order the Only-Some-People-Deserve-To-Be-Happy Meal!"

    (stolen shamelessly from a friend's FB page this morning.)
    posted by jeanmari at 11:52 AM on August 2, 2012 [17 favorites]


    Oh, and as far as the actual restaurants go: if you want a chicken sandwich, they've been good every time I've eaten there. As fast food goes, it's pretty good, though it is heavily salted. (not as bad as Arby's, but it seems worse than most other chains.)

    Ever since they changed their oil, I've found KFC absolutely gross. I used to like their chicken reasonably well, in the old oil, but I despise it now. They had to change the breading too, and the flavor is different. It's just nasty.
    posted by Malor at 11:52 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    it's called 5 guys because it takes 5 guys a half an hour to make your goddamn burger /derail
    posted by George_Spiggott at 11:52 AM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    I'll be wearing a black t-shirt from the band The Dwarves that reads "TEACH CHILDREN TO WORSHIP SATAN".

    Well thanks for confirming every stupid stereotype the Sarah Palins of the world are pushing on this issue, I guess.
    posted by yoink at 11:53 AM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    Were they also giving out free axe handles?
    posted by MrBadExample at 11:53 AM on August 2, 2012


    You'd never see that many Christians lined up to help at a food bank or homeless shelter. And that's something Jesus actually said to do.

    Please join me any Monday at the parking lot of St. George's Orthodox Church here in Orlando. If you tell me your shirt size, I can have a "Matthew 25" t-shirt ready for you.
    posted by Tanizaki at 11:54 AM on August 2, 2012 [15 favorites]


    Homophobes sure like chicken huh?
    posted by djseafood at 11:54 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I'm sorry, you must have read that as "In-N-Out Burger."

    If I wasn't already lethargic from eating lunch, I would totally get up from this chair and come over there and bop you one.

    Coincidentally, In-n-Out are a "Christian outfit" but they don't let it get weird.
    posted by Celsius1414 at 11:54 AM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    while a boycott by liberals is unconscionable, and can't possibly be allowed by the Constitution

    It's not just a boycott. Lots of liberals said mean things about the CEO and hurt his feelings! He's been the target of "malicious criticism" and Christians aren't buying chicken to attack gays, they're just trying to make him feel better after the liberals spent thousands of dollars lobbying the government to take away his rights called him names.
    posted by straight at 11:56 AM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    Well thanks for confirming every stupid stereotype the Sarah Palins of the world are pushing on this issue, I guess.

    Yeah, because we should totally let stupid fuckers define what's okay.
    posted by Celsius1414 at 11:56 AM on August 2, 2012 [35 favorites]


    Man some people really, really, really want to be a persecuted minority but without all that being persecuted or being a minority stuff.

    Well, who wouldn't want to be, right? I mean, look how much fun it is!
    posted by rtha at 11:56 AM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    It has astonished me how many people have basically lost friends over this topic, if my Facebook feed is to be believed. It's not like there haven't been gay-rights social media kerfuffles before, but this one is bringing out the knives.

    (It does not surprise me that *I* haven't lost friends over it, because anyone likely to say anything asinine about gay people is either not my Facebook friend or has long since been hidden.)
    posted by restless_nomad at 11:57 AM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    The other day, my brother-in-law posted some crap on his Facebook about how he was hitting up CFA on the way home, because "NO HOMO".

    Not that I have him as a Facebook friend, anymore, although my husband does. I kicked the BIL off when he got up bright and early on February 1 to complain about how unfair Black History Month is to hardworking white men like himself who never asked for a handout. All said by the man who moved back in with his father because he can't keep a job, won't stop smoking pot so he can pass a drug test, and who has no paternal rights to his baby because he'd rather scream about how women are bitches, than he would do the minimum to get his name on the birth certificate.

    Everyone in my life who is out Supporting CFA is like my BIL in sprit. Also, one of my friends just had to deal with someone calling the boycott of CFA "an attack on the Kingdom of God". Do they seriously think this shit?
    posted by Coatlicue at 11:57 AM on August 2, 2012 [12 favorites]


    So, shitty but inexplicably praised?

    More along the lines of "better on many metrics than, say, McDonalds but by no means the final word on what they sell."
    posted by gauche at 11:58 AM on August 2, 2012


    Coincidentally, In-n-Out are a "Christian outfit" but they don't let it get weird.

    Given the religious make-up of the USA, the majority of privately-owned businesses are probably owned by Christians. Which shows that Chik-Fil-A aren't being boycotted just out of a general hostility to Christianity.
    posted by straight at 11:59 AM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


    > Chick-fil-a has always pushed its Christian identity, to the point of never being open on Sundays.

    I have heard that this is why they won't open a store in Las Vegas, either.

    posted by mmrtnt at 11:59 AM on August 2, 2012


    I will be at the Chick-Fil-A near Patton Creek south of Birmingham, AL in the afternoon if anyone wants a smooch.

    We're expecting plenty of tongue.
    posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:59 AM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    it's called 5 guys because it takes 5 guys a half an hour to make your goddamn burger /derail

    Eh? This has not been my experience really ever. Maybe it's a regional thing.

    I will also sing the praises of Chick-Fil-A sandwiches as being a whole lot better than a standard fast food sandwich. The chicken is crispy and juicy and the bun is toasted and buttery; the McDonald's Southern Style Chicken sandwich is a poor approximation.

    That said, while I'm not formally boycotting them, I'm not seeking them out either. There was a Chick-Fil-A truck near my office the other day and I totally would have gone except for the fact that it seemed insensitive to my gay coworker who just got married. If I were alone, I'd consider it, because I don't think my four bucks matters much anyway, but I'm not going to flaunt it.
    posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:00 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Well, these religious groups can feel free to espouse their political opinions. I mean, they pay their taxes, right? Oh.

    Well in that case these stupid fucking fucks can go shove a can up their christ-hole and leave everyone else alone.
    posted by "Elbows" O'Donoghue at 12:01 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Yeah, because we should totally let stupid fuckers define what's okay.

    Maybe the best way to fight back against stupid fuckers is not to just go out and do whatever it is that they say you'll do. In this case, it seems to be you who is letting the stupid fuckers define your actions.

    Unless, of course, you are genuinely a committed satanist who only cares about gay marriage because it pisses off Christians. I would have thought that that was a vanishingly small percentage of the population, but I guess it's sobering to learn that Palin et al. aren't totally delusional on that score.
    posted by yoink at 12:01 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I don't buy Chick-Fil-A because of their politics. I don't buy Five Guys because of their hamburgers.
    posted by dirtdirt at 12:02 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]



    Given the religious make-up of the USA, the majority of privately-owned businesses are probably owned by Christians


    In a public company, the shareholder lawsuits would have been filed the moment the segment with Dan Cathy aired. Due Diligence and all that...
    posted by mikelieman at 12:02 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Maybe it should be Six Guys.

    Zing!
    posted by gagglezoomer at 12:02 PM on August 2, 2012


    I hope that it goes the way of Krispy Kreme.

    Wait, what's wrong with Krispy Kreme? What cause am I betraying by eating delicious donuts?
    posted by asnider at 12:02 PM on August 2, 2012


    So this one time my wife was pregnant and was having a tough time sleeping. During her pregnancy she got this bitching pillow from Brookstone or something, and I tell you, that Uber Pillow was softer than a Care Bear's belly. Lovely pillow.

    Anyway, she used that thing for her whole pregnancy and it really helped her sleep. Pretty rad. Good investment.

    No longer pregnant, Mrs Tevin sometimes likes to swap sides of the bed we sleep on. I don't mind changing things up with her because she almost always forgets to take her Uber Pillow with her to my side of the bed and I get to use it for the night. I love that fucking pillow.

    Anyway, one night, without swapping I decided that I would take the pillow without us actually swapping sides because I felt entitled to do so. 'She's no longer pregnant, why would she care?'

    "Way to be a dick, Tevin" you say, to which I say, "You are correct, sir and/or madam!"

    This led to the dumbest argument we've ever had, and it was over a goddamned pillow. I think tears were shed, I'm not sure, but probably because I almost always cry when we fight. At some point though, we stopped talking about the pillow and you know, some real feels were shared. And then at another point at like, 3 am my wife and I are sitting up in bed, talking about all kinds of shit that we'd been repressing since the birth of our daughter and other monumental life changes. Turns out, of course, there was some stuff we needed to hash out but didn't know about or weren't willing to face. Looking back on it I say: thank goodness for that pillow.

    CFA is the Uber Pillow of the Left and Right. Hopefully it leads to some sort of teary-eyed conversation in the middle of the night, followed by emotional growth and deepened understanding of one another.
    posted by Tevin at 12:02 PM on August 2, 2012 [43 favorites]


    FWIW, Screw KFC, Popeye's FTW...
    posted by mikelieman at 12:03 PM on August 2, 2012 [12 favorites]


    Actual letter sent to Chick-Fil-A from 17 members of Congress.

    That reads like a press release written by their PR.

    I swear this whole thing was ginned up to keep the news cycle filled with divisive culture-war bullshit instead of the misdeeds of the finance sector. America has lost its stupid mind.
    posted by junco at 12:03 PM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    > ...and push battered pieces of bird down their gullets instead

    You know, I totally read that as the not-fried-breading type of 'battered" the first time through.

    posted by mmrtnt at 12:04 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Buy another pillow, Tevin.
    posted by notyou at 12:05 PM on August 2, 2012 [30 favorites]


    America has lost its stupid mind

    This happened quite some time ago, let's face it.
    posted by elizardbits at 12:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    Los Pollos Hermanos for life!
    posted by zombieflanders at 12:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [18 favorites]


    You know, I totally read that as the not-fried-breading type of 'battered" the first time through.

    Unless cfila uses Beyond Chicken in its recipes, both apply.
    posted by notyou at 12:06 PM on August 2, 2012


    I let my sarcasm obscure one of my points in the earlier comment that I do think from the way they talk about it on Facebook that many of the people "deliberately" eating Chik-Fil-A haven't paid much attention to the whole thing and just have a vague idea that a Christian businessman was unfairly targeted by the Liberal War on Christians that FOX is always telling them about.

    So it's possible many of these people aren't really expressing any hardline opposition to gay marriage here. Opposition to gay marriage is eroding among young Evangelicals almost as fast as it is in the rest of the country.
    posted by straight at 12:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Yeah, I'm not happy with elected officials declaring that they will, much less attempting, keep a business from opening in their area simply on the basis of the business owner's beliefs, even including corporate lobbying and campaign contributions. That's a double-edged sword.

    Also, Chick-fil-A's sandwich is weirdly very good, even though it's a bit of fried chicken in bread with a pickle. A chef friend of mine declared confidently, "it's the pickle".

    Finally, I'm generally disinclined to select which businesses I habit primarily on the basis of their politics; there's a bunch of reaosns for that and I don't begrudge other people feeling differently.

    However, as Chick-fil-A has chosen to become symbolic within the context of the issue of gay rights, and that they've eagerly allowed themselves to be made into a high-profile champion of a bigoted position, and after looking at all the noxious photos of conservative fuckwits proudly displaying their fast food purchases, I can confidently say that I will never in my life again eat Chick-fil-A food. And I'm a notorious fan of fast food, it accounts for more than half of all my meals for the last 25 years (life expectancy? what life-expectancy?) and I've eaten there numerous times in the past.

    Never again.

    I'm sure I'm not alone, and this is ultimately a losing issue for them. The tide has already turned. As downing street memo wrote, this is like people and politicians proudly showing up to be photographed patronizing a racist business that doesn't serve black people in 1967. At this point, even homophobes have started to understand that being a homophobe is sort of shameful. It tells you something about the people who are proud to let everyone know of their bigotry at this late-stage.
    posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 12:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    I swear this whole thing was ginned up to keep the news cycle filled with divisive culture-war bullshit instead of the misdeeds of the finance sector

    It's an election year. Culture was bullshit is obligatory.
    posted by dortmunder at 12:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I feel ambiguous about eating there, but ultimately I say let them waste their money on a cause that's going nowhere.

    Actually, if you eat there then they're wasting YOUR money on a cause that's going nowhere.
    posted by jess at 12:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    clockzero: It seems like a certain segment of the right wing has gotten really comfortable with this ideology, in which any attempt to limit their capacity to abuse and ruin the lives of others is bigotry and intolerance against them. It's amazing, this profound sense of entitlement they have. They really seem to believe that denying them the right to be bigoted is, itself, bigotry. Fascinating.

    Actually, it's neither recent, novel, amazing, nor fascinating. This persecution complex (completely at odds with the facts) is part and parcel of the fundies' mindset and has been for a long time. It's just more out in the open and fanned and whipped up and encouraged by the mass media and magnified by social media now.

    yoink: Well thanks for confirming every stupid stereotype the Sarah Palins of the world are pushing on this issue, I guess.

    What do you want him to wear? A bowtie, white gloves, pearls, and espadrilles?

    Maybe the best way to fight back against stupid fuckers is not to just go out and do whatever it is that they say you'll do.

    What should they be doing? Not counter-protesting at all? What the stupid fuckers say we're doing is trying to get married, adopting kids, creating families, opening joint bank accounts, buying houses in their proximity, loving each other, and existing.
    posted by blucevalo at 12:08 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I am really curious how the kiss-in will go tomorrow.
    posted by restless_nomad at 12:08 PM on August 2, 2012


    So glad my parents brought me up Episcopalian instead of religious. Let's go buy some polo shirts, amigos.
    posted by samofidelis at 12:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [12 favorites]


    The only point of my t-shirt is that The Dwarves are the best band ever and they are young and good-looking.
    posted by BitterOldPunk at 12:10 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    the dwarves must die.
    posted by boo_radley at 12:11 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Maybe the best way to fight back against stupid fuckers is not to just go out and do whatever it is that they say you'll do. In this case, it seems to be you who is letting the stupid fuckers define your actions.

    Well, up to a point. I just have an overwhelming urge to freak stupid fuckers out.

    Like the UN Agenda 21 Conspiracy nuts. Every time I hear about them spying on or disrupting local community sustainability meetings, I get the urge to buy an old army jeep and drive around town wearing a blue helmet, or to leave fake "The UN and You" pamphlets lying around town.
    posted by Celsius1414 at 12:11 PM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    Oh, by the way, if you want some really great fast-food fried chicken: Raising Cane's. Only in a few states, sadly, but the chicken is fried to order, which makes an enormous difference.

    Also the toast is unfairly delicious.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:12 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Celsius1414: 'Coincidentally, In-n-Out are a "Christian outfit" but they don't let it get weird.'

    A guy I knew in college wanted to get a 666x666. However, they refused to sell it to him. I guess that the 'not weird' part was they did sell him a 664x664 and a double double. I can't remember if they catered the double double, or if he had to get it separately.
    posted by nobeagle at 12:12 PM on August 2, 2012


    Were they also giving out free axe handles?

    I'm pretty sure Lester never gave anything away for free.
    posted by steambadger at 12:12 PM on August 2, 2012


    Man, this whole we're expressing our first amendment rights, by treating other people like sub-humans, so don't make US feel bad about it argument, the GOtP-er dullards have created makes my head hurt...

    Idiotocracy was indeed not simply satire, but prophesy..
    posted by Skygazer at 12:12 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    This happened quite some time ago, let's face it.

    Yeah, but. I live outside the country now, so I get to experience this from a distance (glory be), and this feels different. The entire country is screaming at each other about a literal fast-food fried chicken restaurant and what its bigoted owner thinks, while the financial elite continue to make off with everybody's money.

    I'm going to stop paying attention and watch this baby bird outside. As somebody said upthread, love, not hate.
    posted by junco at 12:13 PM on August 2, 2012


    Can I derail for a moment with a happy memory? I can? Thanks.

    Ten years ago, my wife and I went to the hospital for her to deliver our first child. She was determined to go natural, and that beautiful woman labored for the better part of a day, in absurd amounts of pain. Finally, late in the evening, she relented and took the epidural and our beautiful boy came out not much later. By then it was 2 in the morning and she was starving. So I hoofed down to the cafeteria, which was closed but there were still some Chick-Fil-A sandwiches sitting under the warmer. She and I will never forget how good those sandwiches tasted.

    I really hate their position on same-sex marriage and "traditional" marriage, not only because it's so stupid and backwards and hurts people, but also because as a company, they do so many other things right. Their stores are clean. Their customer service is legendary. Their product is good. They pay the kids they hire more than typical fast-food wages. As someone else pointed out, they have fresh fruit and put science-related activities in the kids meals (alongside the Veggie Tales stuff, but hey). They give lots of money to things that are good, like uniforms for kids' sports teams.

    But then you read about the Uganda connection, and that Exodus group? Horrifying. I continue to be amazed at how very un-Christ-like many Christians are.
    posted by jbickers at 12:15 PM on August 2, 2012 [10 favorites]


    What do you want him to wear? A bowtie, white gloves, pearls, and espadrilles?

    How about not wearing a T-Shirt that confirms the narrative of the anti-gay bigots: that this is all about attacking "Christianity" and not about affirming the rights of people who love each other to get married?

    If you're a press photographer or a cameraman sent to get some B-roll footage of this counter-protest, who do you think will make useful fodder for a news story? The guy in the ordinary shirt or the guy in the attention-grabbing "Teach Your Children to Worship Satan" shirt? What image is going to give the Sarah Palin's of this world a little tingle in their no-no places when they see it? What image do you think the right wing blogosphere would merrily pass around for years afterwards as "proof" that they were right all along and that the people who support gay marriage just "hate Christians"?

    If the point of the counter-protest is to advance the cause, then wearing a "Teach your children to worship Satan" t-shirt is about as counterproductive as it is possible to be.
    posted by yoink at 12:15 PM on August 2, 2012 [25 favorites]


    I weep for the chickens.
    posted by MoonOrb at 12:15 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    "It has astonished me how many people have basically lost friends over this topic, if my Facebook feed is to be believed."

    As you mention, I guess you can carefully edit whose feeds you see. But, still, I have to say that this is a huge benefit of my having left Facebook two years ago. I don't even have to vaguely suspect all the offensive things various family and friends are posting to their feeds, much less deal with it directly. I hear so many stories about stuff like this from people I know — it's one-half escalating incredibly angry arguments between family or old friends, and one-half a perverse voyeurism at such outrageous posts and arguments. To me, it calls to mind sewage.

    I don't want to ever see anyone I am related to, or know, or have known, write about how Black History Month is horribly unfair to them as a white person. Just knowing that anyone, anywhere, writes shit like that in public makes my day a little worse.
    posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 12:15 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Unless, of course, you are genuinely a committed satanist who only cares about gay marriage because it pisses off Christians. I would have thought that that was a vanishingly small percentage of the population, but I guess it's sobering to learn that Palin et al. aren't totally delusional on that score.

    The point of this sort of thing is to draw attention to the fact that "Hey, there's a lot of people that support gay marriage." Sometimes making yourself more noticeable is a good strategy to do that.

    Anyway, I doubt the people that are on the edge about gay people being Satanists (which growing up attending an Evangelical Church in Colorado Springs, I honestly can't recall ever having anyone claim that, and I heard that A LOT of groups were Satanists. Maybe the "forces of evil Conspiracy theories" have changed, or I just don't recall it) are the kind of people who are going change their minds about the issue of marriage.
    posted by Gygesringtone at 12:16 PM on August 2, 2012


    'Such images... created a social media frenzy on Wednesday as they were shared and reshared on a variety of platforms, including Twitter.'

    New rule: before broadcasting your hate via your iPhone over Facebook and Twitter, consider for at least one minute the cognitive dissonance that you're using the services of some of the most LGBT-friendly companies in America to show how bigoted you are.
    posted by Bora Horza Gobuchul at 12:17 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    To those who are referring to CFA's food as "greasy": Have you ever actually eaten it? It's been years since I have but from what I can remember it was on the light to moderate end of the fat spectrum.
    posted by ancienteyes at 12:17 PM on August 2, 2012


    Heh. Chicken wingnuts.
    posted by MuffinMan at 12:21 PM on August 2, 2012 [10 favorites]


    If only Chick-Fil-A could have made their anti-gay announcement on Metafilter rather than on the news... then instead of all this "protest" and "counter-protest" hyperbole the mods could simply have told them to take it to MetaTalk.
    posted by wolfdreams01 at 12:21 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    The best fast food fried chicken is Pollo Campero. I no longer live near one and sometimes it just breaks my heart.

    I will never forget the day my Chick-Fil-A loving friend convinced me to go there instead of Pollo Campero one day after school, by virtue of his having a car and being willing to drive there. I capitulated after a brief fight, having never eaten there and being curious (but not curious enough to overcome my suspicions since I knew they were always closed on Sundays.)

    As I went to grab a straw for my drink, I knocked over all of the straws. I leaned down to pick them up off the floor before someone came from around the counter to help. As she approached, I heard her say "Oh, why, that's mighty white of you to help out, there, but don't you worry!"

    I don't remember what the sandwich tasted like, but I do remember wanting my money back.
    posted by Mizu at 12:21 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    And of course, I made a drawing
    posted by mmrtnt at 12:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    > The best fast food fried chicken is Pollo Campero.

    No way. Los Pollos Hermanos.
    posted by Burhanistan at 12:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    As somebody said upthread, love, not hate.

    I'm all about love and toleration, but some folk need to be banished. To the moon.
    posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 12:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I hope that it goes the way of Krispy Kreme.

    Wait, what's wrong with Krispy Kreme?


    I think the analogy is that it's a longtime Southern food chain staple that has rapidly expanded, riding waves of enthusiasm about how much better their product is than the norm. Krispy Kreme expanded way too quickly and had to contract quite a bit. I'm sure there are still some around here, but I have no idea where they are off the top of my head.

    Oddly enough, my local Chik-Fil-A occupies a former Krispy Kreme location.
    posted by LionIndex at 12:24 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    boo_radley: "the dwarves must die."

    but they're The Band That Wouldn't Die
    posted by namewithoutwords at 12:24 PM on August 2, 2012


    Well thanks for confirming every stupid stereotype the Sarah Palins of the world are pushing on this issue, I guess.

    So? People live in ways you don't every single day of the year. If Sarah Palin has a stupid stereotype about people who wear Satanic band t-shirts, then that's too damn bad for her (and you, I guess). I have plenty of opinions about people like her, but I don't see them being pressured to wear something I approve of.

    And on preview: Satanists, anti-theists, and/or the irreverent have as much right to show up to these protests as anyone else does, whether their presence "advances the cause" or not. Funny how no one frets over whether Christian groups should be allowed to "look like" they hate gays, but everyone else is supposed to walk on eggshells lest they "look like" they oppose Christianity...
    posted by vorfeed at 12:25 PM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    What should they be doing? Not counter-protesting at all?

    Counterprotest all you like. If you counterprotest wearing blend-in, traditionally "respectable" clothing, then your actions will make one statement. If you counterprotest wearing T-shirts that loudly proclaim things like "TEACH CHILDREN TO WORSHIP SATAN," then you're going to discover that you are making a different statement—entirely irrespective of whether the Dwarves are a good band, by the way.

    That's reality. Appearances matter. Call it shallow or arbitrary or unfair, but it's how the world works. Armed with that knowledge, you can make an informed decision about what you want your counterprotest to say. If you think the Satan shirt will make you "more noticeable," so be it. It's your counterprotest and I support your right to stage it effectively or not, but I would think you'd want to stage it effectively.

    I'm curious whether this kiss-in is actually going to happen inside the stores. Because obviously if you're just hanging out in their store kissing and not buying any food, they can boot you. And if you are buying food...well, then what do they care about your politics? They got your money.
    posted by cribcage at 12:25 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Please join me any Monday at the parking lot of St. George's Orthodox Church here in Orlando. If you tell me your shirt size, I can have a "Matthew 25" t-shirt ready for you.

    Thanks for the offer, but why give out free shirts to gays? I've got my own fashion sense, and that shirt money could be donated to charity.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:27 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    why give out free shirts to gays? I've got my own fashion sense

    Just a guess, but playing against stereotypes?
    posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 12:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Chick-Fil-A diluted its brand years ago, in my view, by opening mini-outlets in every university, mall and business food court in the southern U.S., at least. You've had the sandwich a few times after working near one, and you won't miss not having one again. There are so many better local options anywhere, so who cares? (The chain Jason's Deli serves food just as quickly, if you don't mind going indoors, and it has gluten-free stuff and fresh fruit served with sandwiches, veggie and vegan options, etc. Does that count as healthy fast food? I think it's billed as "fast casual." So, no, CFA is not head and shoulders above all fast-food places.)
    posted by raysmj at 12:30 PM on August 2, 2012


    Seen on Reddit:

    "I'm not saying America has an obesity problem, but our civil rights debates now hinge on fried chicken." -Ben Kuchera

    Here's the thing: CFA's anti-gay activism is doomed. It is a colossal waste of money; no amount of spending on anti-gay stuff will roll back the tide of progress.

    People were saying the same thing about abortion back in the 80s.

    I don't remember where I read it, but someone mentioned that a few people were joining the hatefest simply because it was liberals who opposed Chick-Fil-A. That pretty much describes my aunt to a T. She claims to be pro-gay, has a gay son, has participated in pride events, but had to post some pro-Chick-Fil-A crap on her Facebook and probably participated in Bigot Wednesday yesterday all because liberals are the ones saying bad things about the restaurant. Apparently she hates liberals more than she likes civil rights for her own son.
    posted by dirigibleman at 12:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


    Counterprotest all you like. If you counterprotest wearing blend-in, traditionally "respectable" clothing, then your actions will make one statement. If you counterprotest wearing T-shirts that loudly proclaim things like "TEACH CHILDREN TO WORSHIP SATAN," then you're going to discover that you are making a different statement—entirely irrespective of whether the Dwarves are a good band, by the way.

    Oh, that's ironic, that we're actually having a "freak the mundanes/show the bigots we're respectable decent human beings" argument in 2012. In a thread about a homophobic chicken chain.
    posted by MartinWisse at 12:31 PM on August 2, 2012 [11 favorites]


    Raysmj: That's actually getting back to their roots; it took something like 20 years of operation before they opened a Chick-Fil-A outside a food court.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:32 PM on August 2, 2012


    Congratulations, Chick-fil-a. You got a one-day sales records. Now let's see how long that will let you endure the perpetual boycott by me and all my like-minded friends.
    posted by crunchland at 12:33 PM on August 2, 2012 [9 favorites]


    My favorite on Facebook was someone I know from high school who rarely posts anything but self-help or affirmation-type posts, then had three posts in a row with stuff about how CFA respects the LAWS OF GOD (all caps in the graphic) and LIFE IS TEMPORAL, CFA remembers what is important and is not PC. He followed up the following morning with a post about how he went to see Motley Crue and KISS that night.
    posted by raysmj at 12:34 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    " Thanks for the offer, but why give out free shirts to gays? I've got my own fashion sense, and that shirt money could be donated to charity."

    There is a reason both secular and religious charities give out shirts to volunteers, they are dirt cheap and for their value are effective at aquring and maintaining volunteers. Much more efficient than the staff time needed for an equivalent effect. But right, Christians are imperfect and that is what is important here.
    posted by Blasdelb at 12:35 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    bluecevalo >

    Actually, it's neither recent, novel, amazing, nor fascinating. This persecution complex (completely at odds with the facts) is part and parcel of the fundies' mindset and has been for a long time. It's just more out in the open and fanned and whipped up and encouraged by the mass media and magnified by social media now.

    Well, I find it very interesting, if you please, but I am a sociologist.

    I wasn't talking about the persecution complex, itself, which is fairly well-established, but more specifically a half-articulated conviction composed of several integral parts: that white, heterosexual American Christians have a right to oppress other people, that this right is derived from their religious liberty (regardless of the relevant Christian teachings or the applicability of religious principles to the matter at hand), and that people who object either to their perceived divine right to impunity and dominion or to their actual treatment of others are the *real* bigots (I think this last part is the marker of modernity).

    Clearly there are significant historical antecedents (segregation, exterminating Native Americans, the institution of slavery, Japanese internment, and more), but nothing that quite combines these elements in this specific way. If you believe that this is also a long-standing and well-known phenomenon, I'd really love some suggestions for where I can read more about it in American history.
    posted by clockzero at 12:36 PM on August 2, 2012 [23 favorites]


    Here's the thing: CFA's anti-gay activism is doomed. It is a colossal waste of money; no amount of spending on anti-gay stuff will roll back the tide of progress.

    People were saying the same thing about abortion back in the 80s.


    Exactly. There's a better-than-50% chance we'll have a Congress that's willing to reauthorize DOMA and bring back DADT (and a Supreme Court that might join in when they're not rolling back Roe v. Wade) and about 50/50 chance that there will be a President who will gladly do whatever they say when it comes to gay rights.
    posted by zombieflanders at 12:36 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    If you counterprotest wearing T-shirts that loudly proclaim things like "TEACH CHILDREN TO WORSHIP SATAN," then you're going to discover that you are making a different statement

    Yes, you are stating that you have a fucking sense of humor, god forbid.
    posted by FelliniBlank at 12:37 PM on August 2, 2012 [20 favorites]


    > So I hoofed down to the cafeteria, which was closed but there were still some Chick-Fil-A sandwiches sitting under the warmer. She and I will never forget how good those sandwiches tasted.

    Don't do that to me!

    Ah heck, what's wrong with my eyes? Damn allergies.

    posted by mmrtnt at 12:37 PM on August 2, 2012


    So: what's the endgame in all this?

    What does either side (protesters and supporters) hope to accomplish, ultimately?

    For protesters, I really doubt that they will make CFA capitulate or seriously damage their business.

    For supporters, well, do they just want to make CFA feel better about themselves?

    I really don't know.
    posted by Tevin at 12:38 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    The discussion of CFA's food makes me a little uneasy, since it's typical of right wing conservative bigots to assert a direct causal relationship between the quality of their food/restaurants and the nature of their beliefs.

    Either patronize them because you support their values, or boycott them because you don't, and leave the gourmet reviews to people who don't care about gay issues. What, the stores are too clean for you to support gay rights? Gay marriage is obviously wrong or else the chicken wouldn't taste so good?

    (Not directed at anyone in particular, but wanted to make the point explicit: the food is not the issue here.)
    posted by ceribus peribus at 12:39 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Is there some restaurant that those of us on the right side of history can go to to show our support?

    If not, I'm going to make fruit salad, with fruits in all the colors of the rainbow.
    posted by madcaptenor at 12:40 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    But right, Christians are imperfect and that is what is important here.

    We clearly live in a time of plenty, when religious people directed to buy food in one big orgy of consumption can so blatantly ignore the teachings of Jesus. Mammon would be proud.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:41 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    I think for most protesters, it's about letting as little of our money as possible end up in the hands of groups agitating for anti-gay hate.
    posted by dirigibleman at 12:42 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    i don't have high hopes about a mass kiss in. bigots going to eat their hate sandwiches had zero fear of being physically harmed by those that disagree with them. gay people walking into a space known to be full of bigots aren't so lucky, especially if they "flaunt their sin" in front of the children.
    posted by nadawi at 12:42 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    My FB had a fun little suggestion this morning: donate the price of a Chick-Fil-A sandwich to a GLBT organization (in Chick-Fil-A's name, if that's how you roll).

    (There are no Chick-Fil-A's in my state so I had to ask how much that actually was, and someone told me $6.50. I appreciate the symbolic value but I may round up.)
    posted by dlugoczaj at 12:45 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    (Not directed at anyone in particular, but wanted to make the point explicit: the food is not the issue here.)

    Yeah, but it's tasty food and a lot of the company's business practices w/r/t customer service and food preparation are admirable and should by rights be commonplace in the industry. Those are things that I would like to support with my dollars, so that other companies would see that their competition is making lots of money by supplying a better product and follow suit, but I can't in good conscience because I'd also be supporting the oppression of my fellow man.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:45 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    and about 50/50 chance that there will be a President who will gladly do whatever they say when it comes to gay rights.

    The chances of Mr. Romney being that president are very low.
    posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:45 PM on August 2, 2012


    Here in Chicago, Chik-Fil-Gay Appreciation Day went pretty well, too.
    posted by me3dia at 12:47 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]




    Is there some restaurant that those of us on the right side of history can go to to show our support?

    Since there's not quite enough hot-button issues floating around today, I'll bet there's a local restaurant that makes better food and coincidentally keeps revenue in its municipality rather than beaming it to the corporate overlord satellites. They might even be nice people with relatively sane political and ethical viewpoints.
    posted by Celsius1414 at 12:48 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Here's the plan: We coordinate a day where everyone goes to Chik-fil-a and orders a meal, takes it to their tables, and returns it to the counter a minute or so later with a bite taken out politely complaining that it tastes "off" or "funky" and ask for a refund per their satisfaction guarantee. If we get tens or hundreds of thousands to do this on the same day it would not only result in massive revenue losses in refunds, but much loss through discarded inventory.

    Someone with more time please coordinate this for me, via FB, Twitter, Reddit, etc.
    posted by sourwookie at 12:49 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    I unfriended a high school friend on Facebook last night because she defended Chick-fil-a with the annoying "free speech" crap. I may disagree with your beliefs and I'll defend to the death your right to hold them, but I just don't need to be friends with intolerance. Ugh.
    posted by bendy at 12:51 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    This thread is making me both hungry and angry. Hangry.
    posted by elizardbits at 12:53 PM on August 2, 2012 [24 favorites]


    We coordinate a day where everyone goes to Chik-fil-a and orders a meal, takes it to their tables, and returns it to the counter a minute or so later with a bite taken out politely complaining that it tastes "off" or "funky" and ask for a refund per their satisfaction guarantee.

    Tell them it tastes "a little gay".
    posted by Rock Steady at 12:53 PM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


    People were saying the same thing about abortion back in the 80s.

    True, but there are both wealthy and male gay people.
    posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:53 PM on August 2, 2012 [9 favorites]


    I'm not sure wasting a bunch of food is a good way to make a point about this.
    posted by merelyglib at 12:53 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    The chances of Mr. Romney being that president are very low.

    If you've actually been reading 538 consistently, you'd have seen lots of warnings about polls this far out and the bad mojo that can happen between now and November. It's just under 100 days to the election, neither party has held their conventions, both the US and EU central governmental economic decision-makers (Fed and ECB) have simultaneously said things are getting worse and that they're not going to do anything about it unless it gets really bad, and over half of the counties in the US are in drought conditions right now. All it takes is something like a nasty drop in real GDP (which according to the Fed is pretty damn likely) for those numbers to change.
    posted by zombieflanders at 12:54 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    and returns it to the counter a minute or so later with a bite taken out politely complaining that it tastes "off" or "funky" and ask for a refund per their satisfaction guarantee

    I wonder if they'd honor that guarantee if I told them it tasted like hate and bigotry and oppression.
    posted by elizardbits at 12:54 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    bendy, I've unfriended two high school friends for similar comments supporting Chick-fil-A. One of them defended herself by telling me she has a gay brother that she loves.

    The sad thing is that between these two women, they have NINE children who are learning to hate others.
    posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:54 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Chick-fil-a Is Actually Popular

    -Techcrunch
    posted by mmrtnt at 12:54 PM on August 2, 2012


    2nding "hangry"

    so hangry
    posted by raihan_ at 12:55 PM on August 2, 2012


    Thanks for the offer, but why give out free shirts to gays? I've got my own fashion sense, and that shirt money could be donated to charity.

    I don't know. Don't gay people like t-shirts? I have seen ones that say, "I'm not gay but my boyfriend/girlfriend is." (get it? lol)

    But frankly, I would offer t-shirts to anyone and it would never occur to me to ask a volunteer at the weekly event to feed the homeless what he or she prefers to do with his or her genitals. I am more concerned that when the task at hand is feeding the hungry, your first thought was of fashion.

    Of course, while I do not know where you live, chances are that it would not be reasonable to expect you to travel to central Florida. I recommend that you donate your time to a local soup kitchen if you are truly concerned about such things.
    posted by Tanizaki at 12:55 PM on August 2, 2012


    so hangry

    When you're just glowering and scowling at the waffle chips as you slowly, methodically chew them.
    posted by The Whelk at 12:56 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish: "Oh, by the way, if you want some really great fast-food fried chicken: Raising Cane's. Only in a few states, sadly, but the chicken is fried to order, which makes an enormous difference.

    Also the toast is unfairly delicious.
    "

    Hey, wow, we have one of those here but I always thought it was a sit-down place. I'll have to stop in there soon.
    posted by that's how you get ants at 12:56 PM on August 2, 2012


    Since there's not quite enough hot-button issues floating around today...

    Speaking of which, Fans, protesters, PETA converge on Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day
    People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, also intends to protest at the same location, calling attention to “Chick-fil-A’s cruelty to chickens as well as its anti-gay stance.”
    posted by Celsius1414 at 12:56 PM on August 2, 2012



    It's a times like this that I just sit and ponder how Canada and the US who have so much in common ended up so different.

    Following this story is just baffling.
    posted by Jalliah at 12:57 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Someone with more time please coordinate this for me, via FB, Twitter, Reddit, etc.

    And people are confused when I tell them that most activism is just glorified freeloading.
    posted by Tanizaki at 12:58 PM on August 2, 2012


    yoink captured my feelings exactly. We have a CFA in our town and it is pretty damned good. We knew vaguely that there was some anti-gay corporate feeling, but it was not enough to make us say "we will boycott this place to send a message." Particularly because I thought it unfair to ascribe a political position to a business as a whole.

    But now, as they find themselves in the midst of this bizarre and sad war (bizarre and sad on both sides, frankly), it's like they decided that they are happy to be the anti-gay totem. To the point that I will feel if I do eat there that I am supporting it. I can only imagine that such a strategy will hurt them in the long run. Because my decision NOT to eat there will be a lot easier and longer lasting than an evangelical's decision to affirmatively spend money there.
    posted by AgentRocket at 12:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [10 favorites]


    I am more concerned that when the task at hand is feeding the hungry, your first thought was of fashion.

    Well, my first thought was, "Why not donate the money that it costs to make t-shirts to a charity or to a food bank?" Mostly because I am lucky enough to have clothes on my back and I don't need my soul to be saved in exchange for a free t-shirt. But I thank you for the gracious and good faith offer.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    dlugoczaj, one my FB friends offered to match anyone donating the price of a meal to GLAAD last night. By the end of the night she was surprised to see how much she'd be spending out of pocket.
    posted by infinitewindow at 1:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    But now, as they find themselves in the midst of this bizarre and sad war (bizarre and sad on both sides, frankly),

    What's sad and bizarre about the people who are rejecting the homophobic machinations of the family that owns Chick-fil-A? Is there something sad and bizarre about standing up for human and civil rights or are you just espousing the tired "both sides are the same because it's complicated" line?
    posted by clockzero at 1:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    To those who are referring to CFA's food as "greasy": Have you ever actually eaten it?

    Sure have! It's greasy.

    The chicken in the sandwiches is just normal fried chicken greasy, but they also put butter or some sort of fake butter oily filth on the buns so that it feels greasy in your hands and makes your hands greasy.

    The little nuggety guys are greasy enough to start turning the bottom of the box they come in sort of transparent.
    posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Everything about this just makes me want to barf.
    posted by indognito at 1:08 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I have been sitting here thinking about boycotts and money donated to organizations etc. etc. Chick-fil-a might be the most prominent example at the moment but of course there have been others, on both sides of the political spectrum.

    What I have been wondering is this: The companies (whether Chick-fil-a, Target, Home Depot or whoever) give money to organizations (on either side of whatever issue) with the point of the organizations being, in the long run, to change people's opinions on a topic.

    Using gay marriage as the example, the question I have is this:

    Is there any proof whatsoever that giving money to an organization to change people's minds on a controversial topic even works? I mean, I don't think there is enough money in the world to change the average Mefite's opinion on it, and I certainly do not think money will change MY mind either.

    So in the long run, is this just shouting past each other? With a lot of money wasted that could have gone to a soup kitchen?
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 1:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    My suggestion: instead of boycotting CFA, visit CFA daily, preferably in large groups. Order a small soda or whatever's cheapest on the menu, and sit down at a table, wearing your favorite LGBT Pride t-shirt. Depending on the size of the group, you may end up taking all the available tables in the establishment -- awww, too bad. Be sure to drive in separate cars so you can take advantage of the ample parking. Encourage other friends to go through the drive-thru to order a small soda, or maybe just to say hello.
    posted by El Sabor Asiatico at 1:10 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    The companies (whether Chick-fil-a, Target, Home Depot or whoever) give money to organizations (on either side of whatever issue) with the point of the organizations being, in the long run, to change people's opinions on a topic.

    I don't think this is accurate. The Chick-fil-a issue specifically (and, I think, the Terget one, although I'd have to go look that up,) were situations where the organization was donating money to groups attempting to change laws. That's a very different thing than attempting to change opinions, and you bet your sweet bippy throwing money at politicians works - it's the foundation of our government.

    In short, it is highly unlikely anyone is going to persuade me that gay marriage is morally wrong, but it is not only likely but has already happened that someone would make it impossible for me to get married regardless of my beliefs.
    posted by restless_nomad at 1:14 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    You hangry people may be surprised by this, but someone's already created your theme song.
    posted by benito.strauss at 1:14 PM on August 2, 2012


    Kent Brockman: Mr. Cathy, what do you say to the accusation that your organisation is run by intolerant homophobes?

    Dan Cathy: [amused] Oh, Kent, I'd be lying if I said we're not intolerant homophobes. So it's guilty as charged.

    Kent Brockman: [pause] Well, touche'.
    posted by sour cream at 1:16 PM on August 2, 2012


    Los Pollos Hermanos for life!

    At least the owner of Chick-fil-A isn't two-faced, like the owner of Los Pollos Hermanos.
    posted by The Deej at 1:16 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    As fast food goes, it's pretty good, though it is heavily salted. (not as bad as Arby's, but it seems worse than most other chains.)

    Wow, a fast-food critic in a thread critical of a fast food joint. Seriously, there is no "good" fast food. It's all crap. Some of it is less crap than others, but it's all still crap. For example, Chipotle makes decent food, and according to their marketing it's healthier than other fast food, but it is still crap. Monster burritos (or whatever) created for the masses. It doesn't make it good. It's not bad, but it's not good. Who cares about the subject of this post? They make crap food too. If you eat their food on a regular basis, your health will suffer. That goes for any of the crap fast food places. You might find some "roach coach" type vendors that are making actual good food, even if it's not healthy, but I don't think you'll find many chains that are making either good or healthy food. The whole argument here is inane if you ask me. But, if you're a connieseur of junk food, you might find a voice here.
    posted by Eekacat at 1:17 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Just another example of the right wing's hatred of market-based solutions.
    posted by ckape at 1:19 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    What I have been wondering is this: The companies (whether Chick-fil-a, Target, Home Depot or whoever) give money to organizations (on either side of whatever issue) with the point of the organizations being, in the long run, to change people's opinions on a topic.

    I think it's more often the case that wealthy business owners donate money to try to influence policy and power structures in accordance with their feelings about what kind of place the world ought to be. That's just my impression.

    Is there any proof whatsoever that giving money to an organization to change people's minds on a controversial topic even works? I mean, I don't think there is enough money in the world to change the average Mefite's opinion on it, and I certainly do not think money will change MY mind either.

    I think you could find evidence of this, albeit indirectly.
    posted by clockzero at 1:20 PM on August 2, 2012


    Anyone know how much money Coca-Cola makes per patron relative to Chick-fil-a's per-patron margin?

    Coca-Cola supports LGBT rights

    Chick-fil-a serves Coca-Cola products (sorry I don't know how to link to 'Drinks' towards the bottom).
    posted by iurodivii at 1:20 PM on August 2, 2012


    I haven't eaten chick-fil-a. What's the closest equivalent in the American Fast Food Pantheon that I can go and order somewhere to pretend that I had it?
    posted by OnTheLastCastle at 1:20 PM on August 2, 2012


    Is there any proof whatsoever that giving money to an organization to change people's minds on a controversial topic even works? I mean, I don't think there is enough money in the world to change the average Mefite's opinion on it, and I certainly do not think money will change MY mind either.

    Well, bear in mind that a lot of hate groups are just flat-out lying to the public about same-sex marriage. So it's not really a leap to think that some minds are getting changed - or more to the point, some people are being mobilized in a way they weren't before, because they're getting fed a bunch of fearmongering fiction.

    But more than that: You might have a point if that money were going towards, say, billboards saying YOU SHOULD THINK THIS WAY! And people would look at it and go, psh, whatever.

    Except that's not where most of the money is going. Chick-Fil-A's money is getting funneled to hate groups like the Family Research Council, who took $25,000 of that money and used it to lobby congress not to condemn a bill that would make being gay a capital offense (or at least punishable by life in prison) in Uganda. And money greases a lot of wheels, that high up.

    Family Research Council couldn't give a fried shit about your opinion on a topic. That's collateral in this fight. What they're trying to change is policy.
    posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 1:20 PM on August 2, 2012 [21 favorites]


    > At least the owner of Chick-fil-A isn't two-faced, like the owner of Los Pollos Hermanos.

    Hey man, despite Fring's murderous ways and profits from meth, I'd bet he was fairly progressive when it comes to civil rights for his chicken workers.
    posted by Burhanistan at 1:21 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    [Turning an offhand comment into a major derail is not helpful - please move on from the t-shirt/charity thing. Thanks. ]
    posted by restless_nomad at 1:21 PM on August 2, 2012


    There are many evils and sins in the world. I think two of my least favorite are:
    1) The self righteousness that comes with the unwavering conviction that you know what is true/right/just.
    2) The self righteousness that comes with the unwavering conviction that you know what is false/wrong/unjust.

    I find few things more bewildering and frightening than the righteousness attendant to any fundamentalism and I am equally distressed and fearful of those who are unwavering in their passion to destroy or harm the righteous.
    posted by rmhsinc at 1:21 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    "...Mike Huckabee sees the success of the campaign as a sign that people are tired of "intolerance and bigotry toward Christians..."....

    Ha ha ha ha.

    Good one, Mike.

    Hang on. The Boy Scout guy is at the door collecting bottles for recycling...

    Ah crap.
    posted by mule98J at 1:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Is there any proof whatsoever that giving money to an organization to change people's minds on a controversial topic even works? I mean, I don't think there is enough money in the world to change the average Mefite's opinion on it, and I certainly do not think money will change MY mind either.

    Iowa recalled three supreme court judges in a very close vote after the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously struck down banning same-sex marriage as unconstitutional.

    There was a HUGE, absolutely MIND BOGGLINGLY HUGE campaign of ads in all media advocating to recall those judges just to prove a political point. The recall is supposed to be based on performance reviews from other judges and lawyers. Each judge of course had stellar reviews and no judge has ever been recalled from Iowa's supreme court.

    So.

    I guess it worked. Good work, out of state conservative groups. You pumped a shit ton of money into my state to prove how much you hate gay people by perverting the intention of that vote.
    posted by OnTheLastCastle at 1:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    The Deej: SPOILER TAGS MANG
    posted by zombieflanders at 1:24 PM on August 2, 2012




    There was a Chick-Fil-A truck near my office the other day and I totally would have gone except for the fact that it seemed insensitive to my gay coworker who just got married. If I were alone, I'd consider it, because I don't think my four bucks matters much anyway
    Is there a word or short phrase that describes this sort of behavior? It's certainly at the very least akin to the Tragedy of the Commons, in that the reasoning is essentially "my small behavior doesn't matter despite everybody's small behavior adding up to something that matters", but that phrase doesn't really seem entirely accurate, as it's a stretch to say that it involves depletion of a resource.

    "Depletion of the resource of public decency" or something, maybe, but like I said that's stretching it.
    posted by Flunkie at 1:27 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Net up for Mike Huckabee: Everyone rides the bus for "Montgomery Transit Authority Appreciation Day"
    posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:29 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    On a related note: Appeals Court: Hate Crimes Act Doesn’t Suppress Anti-Gay Speech
    An appeals court has tossed out a lawsuit from three Michigan pastors challenging the constitutionality of the Hate Crimes Act.

    The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled that the Christian ministers had not established standing to challenge the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which offers harsher punishments for individuals who commit violent acts on individuals due to their sexual orientation.
    posted by zombieflanders at 1:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Sorry, my earlier image link may have been broken, here you go:

    Only in America does a religious pilgrimage take place by car and end up at a fast food restaurant.


    posted by daHIFI at 1:31 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    It's a times like this that I just sit and ponder how Canada and the US who have so much in common ended up so different.

    Give them time.

    Is there any proof whatsoever that giving money to an organization to change people's minds on a controversial topic even works?

    You can't prove the reverse either. And I would say that having a lot of money behind your cause helps you out in many subtle ways that are not directly obvious. For one thing, it lets you inundate the media with your message, which means people are at least aware of it, and makes it seem reasonable through sheer ubiquity. For another, there is simply the availability of opportunity -- if you have a lot of money in the bank you can respond opportunistically to situations as they occur that you'd have to pass up if you were broke.

    Anyway, a lot of money is given out for some reason, and it's naive to think that they aren't expecting something in return for it.
    posted by JHarris at 1:31 PM on August 2, 2012


    There are many evils and sins in the world. I think two of my least favorite are:
    1) The self righteousness that comes with the unwavering conviction that you know what is true/right/just.
    2) The self righteousness that comes with the unwavering conviction that you know what is false/wrong/unjust.

    I find few things more bewildering and frightening than the righteousness attendant to any fundamentalism and I am equally distressed and fearful of those who are unwavering in their passion to destroy or harm the righteous.


    Please tell me your nuanced views on the pros and cons of Jim Crow laws.
    posted by kmz at 1:32 PM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


    Is there a word or short phrase that describes this sort of behavior?

    I don't know about a name for the behavior, but I've heard that sort of behavior pithily described as "No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood."
    posted by DevilsAdvocate at 1:37 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Please tell me your nuanced views on the pros and cons of Jim Crow laws.

    Please tell me about how vibrant your neighborhood is.
    posted by Tanizaki at 1:37 PM on August 2, 2012


    @junco

    what the fuck is a 'finance sector', do they serve chicken
    posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 1:38 PM on August 2, 2012


    My anti-support protest amounted to me making a horrifying giant hamburger out of three McDoubles in which I discarded two rolls and made, for the price of a chicken sandwich stewed in bile and outrage fuel, one big photo-friendly meat nightmare with six patties, and then going home to write a long long note on facebook addressing my friends and relatives who were all reposting "I support Chick-Fil-A!" photos out of some vestigal sense of good ol' Americanism. I've posted the text of the note on my seldom-used bloggy thing, but it's really a sort of anguished note that addresses that weird punched-in-the-gut feeling I have when people I treat with respect, friendship, and generosity take up the cause that's out to hurt people like me.

    The thing is—this is the battle, but we have already won the war.

    Cousins in their sixties and seventies will not be here in ten, twenty, thirty years, and the next generation, by which I mean the kids contemporary with my nieces and nephews, even the ones of the most conservative and/or evangelical parents, just roll their eyes at these plaintive symphonies of bullshit corpophilosophy. We're not in the era when kids just roll over and devour every claim delivered with authority like it was even when I was a kid. It's the age of skepticynicism, and twenty minutes on the web will pretty much suck the life out of all the claims the dark forces of heteronormativity can make.

    Kids, like the honey badger, just don't give a shit. Love who you like, like *shrug* and stuff.

    It's still important to be vigilant, and to be articulate and not to jump readily into the traps the radical right keep ready for the sort of dimwits who hurf durf over dead PR executives and other way-too-obvious targets, but attrition will eviscerate the ranks of the bigots.


    Of course, that fucking hamburger came back to haunt me, but political performance art is a bitch.
    posted by sonascope at 1:38 PM on August 2, 2012 [20 favorites]


    There was a Chick-Fil-A truck near my office the other day and I totally would have gone except for the fact that it seemed insensitive to my gay coworker who just got married. If I were alone, I'd consider it, because I don't think my four bucks matters much anyway, but I'm not going to flaunt it.
    posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:00 PM on August 2 [2 favorites +] [!]


    The four bucks doesn't make a difference at all, but making the decision that says "I'm with you, not with them" to your gay friends/family/neighbors makes more of a difference than you might realize.
    posted by mudpuppie at 1:38 PM on August 2, 2012 [12 favorites]


    CFA is the Uber Pillow of the Left and Right. Hopefully it leads to some sort of teary-eyed conversation in the middle of the night, followed by emotional growth and deepened understanding of one another.

    I like your optimism. I don't share it, but I like it.

    As a couple of others here have said, this whole controversy feels a lot to me like a massive derail. I do support the rights of same sex couples to marry, and I'll be happy when the day comes that society frowns on gay bashing to the point where no smart business would even remotely dream of spewing hate like this. Lobbying to keep Congress from taking a stand against the death penalty for homosexuals? Really?

    But until that day comes, what we have here is a good old fashioned wedge issue that both parties can use to whip up the base, and deflect attention from the rampant kleptocracy that they are allowing.

    But then I suppose that once we resolve this wedge issue, they'll just come up with another one...
    posted by zoog at 1:44 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    "Mike Huckabee sees the success of the campaign as a sign that people are tired of "intolerance and bigotry toward Christians".".
    "I just put my head clean through my desk."

    "Man some people really, really, really want to be a persecuted minority but without all that being persecuted or being a minority stuff."
    Hi, I'm an academic, and I've learned the hard way that I need to make up excuses for where I am on Sunday mornings, skip Ash Wednesday, and reply evasively to any questions about my religion at work. I’ve found that for a not insignificant number of my peers and mentors, even a whiff of religious inclination is an invitation to clumsy and aggressive attempts at conversion, to question my ideas for imagined faith based bias, and avoid even the most obvious of collaborations. The wrong person finding out about my Christian identity has already been a primary component of me nearly losing my job once in my young career, and talking to older Christians in my field I can only expect more drama unless I remain perfectly closeted. What really breaks my heart was, while teaching in the big state college of a deeply purple state, my visibly Christian students with un-hidable accents and brilliant minds who went into pharmacy or agricultural tracks rather than hard science, not because they wanted to, but because they knew.

    The response to Chik-fil-A’s bigotry is not an example of this, not at its core anyway, and were I still in the states I’d be kissing same gendered folks with everyone else, but just because Huckabee is a clueless asshole doesn’t mean he is entirely wrong. As an adult convert from non-religiousness, I was myself pretty shocked at the number of doors that are effectively closed to all but the most non-committedly cultural of Christians, and particularly conservative ones.
    posted by Blasdelb at 1:44 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Please tell me about how vibrant your neighborhood is.

    Plenty.

    But I don't really get the point of your question. The only way I can figure how to interpret it does not speak well of you.
    posted by kmz at 1:48 PM on August 2, 2012 [11 favorites]


    Hi, I'm an academic, and I've learned the hard way that I need to make up excuses for where I am on Sunday mornings

    This is a very interesting perspective and one I've heard from a friend of a friend who is also an academic, but I think you're overestimating the number of doors that are effectively closed. Although I don't have an actual counterpoint, I can say that in various industries I've worked in, from high to low, I didn't see evidence of this.
    posted by cell divide at 1:51 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]




    Hi, I'm an academic, and I've learned the hard way that I need to make up excuses for where I am on Sunday mornings

    What kind of assholes do you work with? I'm really blown away by this. I personally have never in my life met anyone who has had anything to say about someone else's participation in Ash Wednesday. Never. The culture must really, really be changing.
    posted by facetious at 1:54 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    New Boy Scout theme song:

    I eat Chick-fil-A, and I'm okay...

    posted by mmrtnt at 1:55 PM on August 2, 2012


    soooo...for the 'kiss-in' protest tomorrow, I made a simple-to-photocopy flyer... too harsh? not harsh enough? I'd appreciate any feedback...and feel free to use/distribute/whatever you like... (mild) trigger warning: gallows (unoccupied)
    posted by sexyrobot at 1:58 PM on August 2, 2012


    What kind of assholes do you work with?

    And what are their Metafilter usernames?
    posted by shakespeherian at 1:58 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    As annoying as this whole thing is, I've been gratified by the discussion I've seen from the "liberal" wing (for lack of a better word) of American Christianity. I'm not sure when I've seen so many thoughtful writers say to the conservative Christians "no, you're really missing the boat today, and here's why." Not vitriolic enough to please some on the secular left, but vitriol doesn't stand a chance of changing minds.

    This is all kind of inside baseball if you're not part of the religious scene, but it's been good to see some more tolerant views being passed around. This one in particular has been cropping up a lot among my Jesusy acquaintances:

    Five Reasons Why The Church Failed Yesterday

    I tried to write something reasonable and nuanced on my blog, and it wasn't getting anywhere, so I just ran with a satire imagining what the beatitudes would look like if Jesus were the person American Evangelicals think he was.
    posted by Pater Aletheias at 1:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [16 favorites]


    I loved Chick-Fil-A.

    I looked forward to when my job would take me near one.

    Now I am in mourning. Ok, maybe not, but seriously, you can hate on the food if you want to, doesn't mean I didn't like it.

    I also like crap TV dinners, so I'm probably not exactly what you would call a foodie.
    posted by cjorgensen at 2:00 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    KMZ--I am not sure how you got to Jim Crow Laws from my post--if you can provide a nuanced explanation of that I might answer. I will be glad to give you my nuanced view of the civil rights movement which took part in the 50's through the present. It was the result of hard work, persistent political action on the center, brilliant and painful legal work on every level, thousands of black and white clergy slowly and and steadily steering their own congregations, human sacrifices, the mobilization of thousands upon thousands of white youth, the bombing of black children and the list goes on. It was won by hard work, persistence, a movement towards the center, humility in leadership, tough negotiations, credible national leaders/politicians and an inevitable tide towards justice and fairness. It was not won by theatrical resistance, vilifying the enemy, t shirts, sensationalism , thumbing your nose at hard care racist picketers blocking school access, guerrilla resistance movements, SNIC etc. It was won through persistent decency, bursts of courageousness, a supportive national media, enlightened leaders and a common cause. I would be glad to continue this discussion through email, meta talk or the phone. But get off the Jim Crow stuff, please.
    posted by rmhsinc at 2:03 PM on August 2, 2012


    I'm an academic, and I've learned the hard way that I need to make up excuses for where I am on Sunday mornings, skip Ash Wednesday, and reply evasively to any questions about my religion at work. I’ve found that for a not insignificant number of my peers and mentors, even a whiff of religious inclination is an invitation to clumsy and aggressive attempts at conversion, to question my ideas for imagined faith based bias, and avoid even the most obvious of collaborations. The wrong person finding out about my Christian identity has already been a primary component of me nearly losing my job once in my young career, and talking to older Christians in my field I can only expect more drama unless I remain perfectly closeted.

    I said it before, but it got deleted by some trigger-happy mod, so here it is, rephrased for MeFi's increasingly delicate sensibilities:

    I think you are overstating the prejudices you feel you are encountering and even if you are not, they pale next to the injustices visited upon homosexuals daily.
    posted by entropicamericana at 2:04 PM on August 2, 2012 [31 favorites]


    > Kids, like the honey badger, just don't give a shit. Love who you like, like *shrug* and stuff.

    I so love the Honey Badger narration.

    Thanks for that smile.

    posted by mmrtnt at 2:05 PM on August 2, 2012


    Jesus was not available for comment.
    posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:08 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    We had our local hate group going down to Massachusetts.

    Oh, and I will never eat a Cuddler.
    posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 2:08 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]




    Jesus was not available for comment.

    Or maybe He was and no one is listening....
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Sambos yet. Hoping that Chick-fil-A will join them on this list in a few years.
    posted by octothorpe at 2:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I was myself pretty shocked at the number of doors that are effectively closed to all but the most non-committedly cultural of Christians, and particularly conservative ones.

    I'm sorry, but if this is the Oppression Olympics, I can only get that via taped delay, so I don't see any reason to play it.
    posted by rtha at 2:11 PM on August 2, 2012 [16 favorites]


    Appearances matter. Call it shallow or arbitrary or unfair, but it's how the world works. Armed with that knowledge, you can make an informed decision about what you want your counterprotest to say. If you think the Satan shirt will make you "more noticeable," so be it. It's your counterprotest and I support your right to stage it effectively or not, but I would think you'd want to stage it effectively.

    Sounds suspiciously like the Tone Argument to me. "We'd listen if you were just nicer about it."

    Millions of LGBT folk the world over have worked to "blend in" for years so as not to offend the delicate fee-fees of the thundering bigots. I don't see where that has helped them obtain the rights the rest of us pretty much take for granted.

    So, yeah, fly your freak flags if you wanna, y'all. I'll help!
    posted by MissySedai at 2:15 PM on August 2, 2012 [14 favorites]


    Look, the truth is that majority doesn't play nice with minority, whatever labels each has at the time.

    Blasdelb wasn't trying to one-up, he was simply sharing an experience. Unless you think he was lying, I don't see a reason to bring out the grar.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:17 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Jesus was not available for comment.

    Or maybe He was and no one is listening....
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:09 PM on August 2 [+] [!]


    The bigots certainly aren't.
    posted by mudpuppie at 2:19 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Chick-Fil-A supports organizations that fight gay rights, but they simultaneously encourage you to put hot cock in your mouth.
    posted by eoden at 2:19 PM on August 2, 2012 [10 favorites]


    Suggestion: As a political statement, let's boycott all the fast food, buy a local chicken, go home, and make some sandwiches. mmm....sandwiches. 100% self-aggrandizement-and hot-air free.
    posted by j_curiouser at 2:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    ppearances matter. Call it shallow or arbitrary or unfair, but it's how the world works. Armed with that knowledge, you can make an informed decision about what you want your counterprotest to say. If you think the Satan shirt will make you "more noticeable," so be it. It's your counterprotest and I support your right to stage it effectively or not, but I would think you'd want to stage it effectively.

    Sounds suspiciously like the Tone Argument to me. "We'd listen if you were just nicer about it."

    Millions of LGBT folk the world over have worked to "blend in" for years so as not to offend the delicate fee-fees of the thundering bigots. I don't see where that has helped them obtain the rights the rest of us pretty much take for granted.

    So, yeah, fly your freak flags if you wanna, y'all. I'll help!



    A church cattycorner to ours got into some controversy a few weeks ago, and protesters came out-and the corner of OUR church parking lot was where the protesters went.(Understandable because those corners were at a fairly major intersection and more eyeballs would be there.)

    My experience, from that, and witnessing -and being part of-other protests is this: You will definitely get the eyeballs with the freakier stuff but from what I have seen those particular people just get laughed at. But to tell the truth I think every protest needs a certain percentage of freaky folk-it's just better if the numbers of regular folk to go with them are sizeable.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    The little nuggety guys are greasy enough to start turning the bottom of the box they come in sort of transparent.
    posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 15:07 on August 2 [+] [!]


    Sure, it's fine if the nuggets do this, but you try something once and now you can't buy any goddamn chicken in this stupid town
    posted by samofidelis at 2:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Can't y'all just go out one night and remove the initial C from the shop names?
    posted by Devonian at 2:24 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Jesus was not available for comment.

    Or maybe He was and no one is listening....
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:09 PM on August 2 [+] [!]

    The bigots certainly aren't.


    Some days, I wonder if ANYONE is.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:24 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Some days, I wonder if ANYONE is.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies


    Do the bunnies listen? ;)
    posted by Celsius1414 at 2:26 PM on August 2, 2012


    They've got the ears for it...
    posted by Scattercat at 2:27 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    "Anyone want to start some sort of black flag operation where we convince bigots to eat massive amounts of greasy fried chicken on a daily basis?"

    There is some sort of fast food foie gras joke here, but I'm too hangry to make it.
    posted by iamkimiam at 2:28 PM on August 2, 2012


    This thread needs fewer vaguely-worded-yet-pointedly-intended comments about who isn't listening to Jesus.
    posted by shakespeherian at 2:28 PM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    I think that most statements in the form of "if only you _____ instead of _____ I would support you" are implicitly of the form of criticism which has no intention of ever being converted into action. I see this all the time in my professional life and it's typically the stuffed-shirt-B-school-types telling engineers their ideas are worthless when they've only superficially considered them. I think it's the same dynamic in this situation as well.
    posted by feloniousmonk at 2:29 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Well, it's hard to listen to Jesus on the topic of same-sex love and relationships, seeing as he never mentioned them. He certainly had a lot to say about not parading one's piety in public, though!
    posted by Sidhedevil at 2:29 PM on August 2, 2012 [46 favorites]


    "I think you are overstating the prejudices you feel you are encountering and even if you are not, they pale next to the injustices visited upon homosexuals daily."

    There is no need to get out the gear for the Oppression Olympics, no one in this thread until you has made any claims about relative levels of oppression. However, the various claims upthread that Christians in the United States face no intolerance are privileged bullshit.
    posted by Blasdelb at 2:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I believe almost every group/person that realizes and appreciates their own victimization/discrimination, at some point, thinks their suffering is unique. I think it is a a bad idea, and particularly self serving, to minimize the real discrimination that others have experienced. Whether one likes it or not there is individual discrimination against Christians in some institutions. Minimizing it does not make your case any stronger.
    posted by rmhsinc at 2:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    KMZ--I am not sure how you got to Jim Crow Laws from my post--if you can provide a nuanced explanation of that I might answer.

    Although I'm sure you do get it, the comparison is in response to your claim that you hate people who are sure of their cause. The point is many people are respected for having been sure of the cause of civil rights now that the fight is no longer controversial. Everyone agrees with which side was right, now... right?

    Basically, there are ethical things you are not willing to negotiate about, even if gay rights aren't among them, so it's not "being sure" that bothers you, it's "being sure about gay rights".

    (I do understand your hope that people can talk and learn rather than just yell at each other - but sometimes you need an event to start the various conversations.)

    my nuanced view of the civil rights movement which took part in the 50's through the present. ... It was won by hard work, persistence, a movement towards the center,... It was not won by theatrical resistance,

    I think bussing white and black people in to sit at lunch counters together was kind of theatrical. There were a lot of marches and sit-ins, too. You don't think any of that had an impact?
    posted by mdn at 2:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    > I think you are overstating the prejudices you feel you are encountering and even
    > if you are not, they pale next to the injustices visited upon homosexuals daily.

    Blasdelb, you just won't know what pain is until the head of a fast food chain says he doesn't like you.
    posted by jfuller at 2:30 PM on August 2, 2012


    I know what people are saying when they describe culture-war stuff like this as "wedge issues" and suggest that it's distracting us from the really important stuff. I have a great deal in common with a lot of people who are both traditionally religious and given to homophobia. (Hey, a lot of my family, maybe even most of my family, fits right in there.) I think that it would be great if people on the cultural left could talk to, say, midwestern lower middle class Christians about their shared economic interests.

    But when I talk to people about this stuff - people like my evangelical, fundamentalist Christian friend of last night's shouting match - and try to really parse what they are saying - well, it feels like this shit runs right down to bedrock. It doesn't feel like an incidental distraction, or a self-contained issue. It's part-and-parcel of all the profound differences in how we think about the world.

    Believing things like "two women could never be married in the sight of God, and however sincere they believe their love to be, it is actually a sin which imperils their souls" fits right in with believing that a woman's place is in the home raising children, that contraception is a moral evil, that the only ultimate basis for belief in any concept or idea is a grounding in a very particular interpretation of the Bible, that science is basically a lot of presumptuous twaddle, that the pain our culture puts gay people through is just a childish delusion on their part, etc.

    I know those folks aren't actually a majority, but there are a lot of them, and major parts of that complex of ideas, or variations on same, run deep and wide in American culture. If they didn't, we wouldn't have so many people so eager to demonstrate their loyalty to a shithead fast food CEO's moneyed bigotry.
    posted by brennen at 2:33 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Blasdelb, you just won't know what pain is until the head of a fast food chain says he doesn't like you. sends acres of money to lobbyists working to deny you human rights and make your existence illegal.
    posted by shakespeherian at 2:33 PM on August 2, 2012 [33 favorites]


    This thread needs fewer vaguely-worded-yet-pointedly-intended comments about who isn't listening to Jesus.
    posted by shakespeherian at 2:28 PM on August 2 [+] [!]

    Sorry. What I meant was I don't think a lot of people on EITHER side were doing much listening.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:34 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    KMZ, actually I did not see the connection. Regardless, watch the hyperbole--I never even came close to using the word hate--I said, least favorite, distressed fearful. yes, sit in's were a bit theatrical but also often calculated to get arrested and precipitate legal proceedings. Busing was not at all theatrical but came out of judicial efforts to correct past wrongs--it was only theatrical fore the pundits, naysayers and media.
    posted by rmhsinc at 2:36 PM on August 2, 2012


    Imagine how stupid...
    posted by crunchland at 2:36 PM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    I'd settle for people listening to each other. Listening to Jesus, belief in his ability to talk back notwithstanding, seems a bit of a stretch these days.
    posted by feloniousmonk at 2:37 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    back
    posted by feloniousmonk at 2:38 PM on August 2, 2012


    Somebody please show me the last time someone in America was killed for simply being Christian. Or denied the right to marry for being Christian. Or fired for being Christian. I'll wait.
    posted by entropicamericana at 2:39 PM on August 2, 2012 [29 favorites]


    I hadn't even heard about this til I checked Facebook where a few relatives/friends were liking this news. Yet another depressing slap on the face to their gay / bi fam/ friends.

    They have a cut-and-paste bible, so they can ignore the stuff that would affect them.
    Cos these same people have made teh sexy times outside of marriage and had multiple divorces. Pretty sure those are no-nos according to their guy in the sky too.
    posted by NorthernLite at 2:43 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]




    KMZ, actually I did not see the connection.

    Did you see that it was not I who replied? Though mdn did get my point exactly right.

    (I also find strange your complete dismissal of SNCC, but whatever.)
    posted by kmz at 2:46 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Blasdelb, you just won't know what pain is until the head of a fast food chain says he doesn't like you.

    It's interesting that I also see this line of thought in Facebook posts from Mormon family members, who also equate an opinion (i.e., "not liking you") with actions, like bribing politicians to pass laws which take away rights.

    Do these people really not understand the difference between an opinion, which is an all-you-can-eat free speech buffet, and hurtful actions that actually-not-pretend take away the Constitutional rights that gays should get to enjoy, just like the rest of the country?

    There is such a clear and massive difference, to me, between the concepts of opinion and action. I just don't understand how people can be so willfully ignorant as to confuse the two.

    Blasdelb and these individuals should perhaps reflect on how very fortunate they are that they will never, ever have to suffer the consequences of real, actionable, not-pretend discrimination such as what Cathy perpetrates with the help of anyone who buys his greasy garbage.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:47 PM on August 2, 2012 [28 favorites]


    My apologies to you, my poorly managed passion of the moment--SNCC did play a role. I just do not think it was as important as they thought. They were bright and creative.
    posted by rmhsinc at 2:50 PM on August 2, 2012


    I don't doubt that people have been fired for being Christian. Likewise, I wouldn't be surprised if at least one American Christian has been denied equal rights and/or been hurt or killed for their religion (there are, for instance, Christians whose religious practices are illegal or extremely unpopular.) "Individual discrimination" can and does happen to people in all groups, even powerful majorities... which is why the question of institutional discrimination tends to be much more illuminating.

    Of course, that's also where claims of "anti-Christian bigotry" evaporate into one big rueful horse-laugh, so perhaps that's why we're not talking about it. Or, on preview: what Blazecock Pileon said.
    posted by vorfeed at 2:51 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    For those playing along at home, here's the recipe for the Chick-Fil-Gay sandwich.
    posted by Dr. Zira at 2:52 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I'd love to see someone produce a series of videos for Youtube featuring prominent gay people such as John Waters eating chicken sandwiches and talking about how much they love chicken sandwiches.
    posted by perhapses at 2:54 PM on August 2, 2012


    "Do these people really not understand the difference between an opinion, which is an all-you-can-eat free speech buffet, and hurtful actions that actually-not-pretend take away the Constitutional rights that gays should get to enjoy, just like the rest of the country?"

    In my experience when I talk to my Christian friends and family about the issue of gay rights, no. They do not see the difference.

    I felt the same way for a long time, I will admit. And for me, it was like this: "I believe that murder is wrong. Murder is against the law. I believe that being homosexual is wrong. Homosexual marriage should be against the law."

    Let me state emphatically: I no longer believe this. I am a Christian and very vocal (though at times, I fear, not vocal enough) about the importance of ensuring equal rights for everyone. Period.

    I have found that when I get other Christians to come around on this, this that their belief is actively oppression someone - well, that's when I've seen some opinions change. But, at least for me, I had to come to that understanding on my own.

    But goddamn if it's not a long, tricky road to navigate.
    posted by Tevin at 2:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [10 favorites]


    St. Alia of the Bunnies: " Some days, I wonder if ANYONE is."

    Blame the clergy. They encourage intolerance and permit it to continue.

    When clergy who purport to speak for your messiah and convey his message preach intolerance and call other human beings an abomination with the full force of a religious faith behind them, after a while outsiders like me begin to wonder if the clergy themselves aren't the ones making his teachings irrelevant. And so they are. It's not as if Jesus' teachings were intended to teach hate or intolerance. Yet such acts have been committed in his name for centuries.

    Christian laity will not listen his teachings until they are taught to properly value them, by clergy. A religion's leaders must set an example and establish precedent.
    posted by zarq at 2:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    who also equate an opinion (i.e., "not liking you") with actions, like bribing politicians to pass laws which take away rights.

    Ages ago, my mom had an uber-Christian coworker who was deeply offended and disturbed by the fact that I was a vegetarian.

    I guess he'd never heard of vegetarians before. He told me with a confused, almost horrified look on his face, "the Bible says it's okay to eat meat."

    He seemed to believe it was sinful of me to not do a thing that is permitted by his religion -- because he could not separate my own choice not to eat meat with the condemnation of everyone who does.

    At that moment I understood the entire Conservative Christian mindset. There is vitally important wiring missing from their brains.
    posted by Foosnark at 3:03 PM on August 2, 2012 [32 favorites]


    My apologies to you, my poorly managed passion of the moment--SNCC did play a role. I just do not think it was as important as they thought. They were bright and creative.

    Different movement, but same time period: When the Mattachine Society and Daughters of Bilitis were marching around in front of the White House in the late 1950s, dressed in suits and ties and twinsets, carrying signs suggesting that homosexuals were human beings who deserved rights, they were regarded as fringe radicals. Within a decade: Stonewall, with drag queens and faggots throwing rocks at the police. Made Mattachine et al. look downright reasonable by comparison.

    The center doesn't exist except in definition to those outside of it. The anti-apartheid/divestment movement on my own college campus wouldn't have gotten half as far without people taking over buildings, hanging banners from the clock tower, and generally raising a ruckus, all of which made those who dressed up and went to their seniro honor society meetings with member of the board of trustees look reasonable and their demands even more so.
    posted by rtha at 3:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    Foosnak: I wonder if that type of thinking indicates some deep, deep difference in wiring. Like Bicameral Mind type deep.
    posted by sourwookie at 3:07 PM on August 2, 2012


    "Blasdelb, you just won't know what pain is until the head of a fast food chain says he doesn't like you."

    Cathy does a hell of a lot more than not like me or other queers, as others have said in this thread, he discriminates in hiring, promotes political bigotry, and seems to be almost singlehandedly discrediting christian capitalism (which has been one of the last remaining refuges of business that is economically moral to the poor in this country) with his hateful bile. He is a Strom Thurmond of our age and we all have a moral duty to oppose him.
    posted by Blasdelb at 3:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    zarq: Christian laity will not listen his teachings until they are taught to properly value them, by clergy. A religion's leaders must set an example and establish precedent.

    It's chicken and egg, though. There are churches, clergy, even entire traditions (Episcopalianism, for example) which are far more tolerant. The laity gravitate toward the churches whose opinions and teachings match what they already believe.

    And if they don't find any, they will form their own... it happens all the time.
    posted by gilrain at 3:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Anyone else think that part of the success of the whole promotion was based in part that it's just more easy to memetically equate "Chick" with "Christ" since, well, they both are one syllable words that start with "ch"? And let's also not forget a certain infamous comic book artist that links it all together too.
    posted by FJT at 3:16 PM on August 2, 2012


    I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Sambos yet. Hoping that Chick-fil-A will join them on this list in a few years.

    WRT to that Wikipedia entry on Sambo's: one of the co-founders was apparently also the owner of the New Orleans Jazz. He moved the team to Utah and sold it. The incomprehensibility of an NBA team called the Utah Jazz is now a little more comprehensible.
    posted by Token Meme at 3:17 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    From Dan Savage yesterday: "Chick-fil-A" is an obvious synonym for "pegging." I mean, obviously, right? I shall now use Chick-fil-A in a sentence: "Her boyfriend's kinda homophobic, but I hear he loves Chick-fil-A."

    Let's kick the Santorum out of this franchise by appropriating its name!
    posted by xenophile at 3:18 PM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    Anyone else think that part of the success of the whole promotion was based in part that it's just more easy to memetically equate "Chick" with "Christ"

    Is that a joke?
    posted by Burhanistan at 3:20 PM on August 2, 2012


    This controversy so stupid that I am seriously thinking about writing a Greasemonkey script to hide all posts with the word "Chick-fil-A" from Facebook.
    posted by cosmic.osmo at 3:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    In the material I read I did not see any references to reasonable evidence of discrimination in hiring, franchising or service. While I find his personal beliefs and philosophy unacceptable and anathema to my own beliefs I am not sure how his views carry over to a franchised operation. Before I boycott it, which is quite easy since I would never have eaten there, I am concerned if there are hundreds of hapless franchise owners swinging in the political winds hoping for a favorable breeze.
    posted by rmhsinc at 3:23 PM on August 2, 2012


    In the material I read I did not see any references to reasonable evidence of discrimination in hiring, franchising or service.

    Dunno what your standard for reasonable evidence is, but there's at least one pending discrimination lawsuit.
    posted by restless_nomad at 3:25 PM on August 2, 2012


    Is that a joke?

    No. I'm just thinking how mneumonic devices could play a role in this. I'm not saying the entire thing is because of the similar sounds, but it's much easier to remember something like "I'm a Christian, so I'm going to eat chicken", as opposed to "I'm a Christian, and I'm going to eat...[bagels, pizza, hot dogs, partially gelatinated gum based beverages]".

    So, I guess nobody else thought of that and my train of thought has gone straight to weirdsville again.

    And the other part of my mind was thinking how the easiest way to end this CFA thing is to have an avian flu or salmonella scare. Having read Fast Food Nation, those are much more likely than we'd like to think.
    posted by FJT at 3:26 PM on August 2, 2012


    Let's kick the Santorum out of this franchise by appropriating its name!

    Well, that's certainly going to take the already entertaining Chick Tracts to a whole new level!
    posted by Celsius1414 at 3:27 PM on August 2, 2012


    This whole thing is like something right out of a David Foster Wallace novel. It'd be clever if it weren't, you know, real life. I just don't even
    posted by Lutoslawski at 3:32 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    I think the religious angle is a sidetrack, actually. I could give two shits if Cathy speaks directly with God. He can have whatever fucked-up opinions he wants. Where he becomes evil and worthy of disrespect is here: His organization has funded groups whose goals are to treat ONE SET OF AMERICANS DIFFERENTLY THAN ANOTHER SET OF AMERICANS. I personally think that that is unChristian, but that's not the important point - it's UNAMERICAN.
    posted by Benny Andajetz at 3:33 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    In discussing this with my mom, I learned just today that she honestly believes being gay is a sin and an abomination.

    =(
    posted by nile_red at 3:37 PM on August 2, 2012


    Waaaaay upthread, someone asked if Chick-fil-a was any good, and the answer of course it is yes, yes it's damn good. Their secret is easy to figure out, though: they use real butter (or real artificial butter flavoring) on both their patties and their buns. Their waffle fries, while crispy, suck - they're bland pieces of waffle-shaped filler.

    The thing is, McDonalds (at least in these parts) has a very close knockoff CFA sandwich, called something like the Southern Chicken Sandwich (or similar - I've only eaten it a couple of times and it's been a good while now). It's an obvious imitation of the 'classic' Chick-fil-a getup, so depending on how one feels about McD's and their policies, practices, and politics, it's an easy greasy fill-in for the Homophobic Sandwich addicted.

    Food for thought.
    posted by item at 3:39 PM on August 2, 2012


    I personally think that that is unChristian, but that's not the important point - it's UNAMERICAN.

    Actually it's very American. Rich man wants to get more rich, so he panders to people's core fears and prejudices that just happens to make them go out and buy something. Nothing is resolved, but money is spent.
    posted by FJT at 3:41 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Regardless, watch the hyperbole--I never even came close to using the word hate--I said, least favorite, distressed fearful.

    Apologies - I think it was the word "evils" that led me to interpret your attitude with that word.

    yes, sit in's were a bit theatrical but also often calculated to get arrested and precipitate legal proceedings. Busing was not at all theatrical but came out of judicial efforts to correct past wrongs--

    If they wanted legal proceedings, they could have just filed legal claims. And I don't know what you mean by "correct past wrongs"...

    Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree on that, but many people who were part of the movement understood the meaning of it to be heavily symbolic and expressive, not just pragmatic. The purpose was to challenge the norms, protest the unfair rules, and show the world that they would not stand for it.

    Contemporary protests often have a harder time making as clear a statement since their opponents are not as explicit, but the effort comes from the same place. The idea of a "kiss-in" is meant to show that gay people won't accept being discriminated against. It's showing up and being gay in a place where it's been made clear they are not welcome. That's what black people were doing at lunch counters - showing up and being black where they had been told they were not welcome.

    (sorry to butt in, kmz! just wanted to add my 2¢)
    posted by mdn at 3:42 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Actually it's very American.

    Seriously. This country was founded on the oppression of minorities.
    posted by elizardbits at 3:42 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]


    On their backs, you could say.
    posted by zombieflanders at 3:49 PM on August 2, 2012


    It was also founded on lofty ideals. And we have and will continue to struggle to lift those ideals above the oppression. In the sense of American ideals, oppression is very unAmerican.

    I'm not usually rah rah USA. However, it's hard to change a system you don't love. We can still turn this thing, slowly, slowly around. If we believe we can't, we should step aside and let those less jaded have a turn at the microphone.
    posted by gilrain at 3:51 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    This whole thing is like something right out of a David Foster Wallace novel. It'd be clever if it weren't, you know, real life. I just don't even

    That's exactly where I'm at-- it has this weird, surreal feeling about it that I could almost believe that it is a giant hoax, or that I'm dreaming. That the governor of a state (someone who used to be morbidly obese but is now just obese) proclaims that we should all appreciate a very successful fast food chain because the owner has been crucified for being a Christian. I just...don't even.

    I have to be honest about this and get this off my chest: I've become a bigot. I didn't used to be. As a young girl and then a young mother I loved and admired my Christian friends and family. Christians demonstrated against the Vietnam war. They sheltered illegal immigrants. They fed the hungry and visited people in prison. But somehow the last 15 years or so my love and admiration has turned first to disappointment and now to anger. These days finding out that someone I've just met is a Christian is always a shock and a lowers that person in my estimation.

    Sorry. I don't like feeling like this.
    posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:51 PM on August 2, 2012 [13 favorites]


    Actually it's very American.

    I meant it's against American principles. Just because we've had more than our fair share of dickheads doesn't mean we're not supposed to aspire as a country.
    posted by Benny Andajetz at 3:52 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    When the mayor of a city wants to deny a privately owned business a license to operate

    And it's a politician listening to his constituency that you find chilling. Glorious new day on metafilter.
    posted by IvoShandor at 3:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]






    I actually refused to eat at chik-fil-a years ago just because they were Christian. I'm either a bigot or ahead of the curve. I don't get dominos for the same reason. Anything I can do to starve the beast.
    posted by empath at 4:04 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    And it's a politician listening to his constituency that you find chilling.

    A politician listening to his constituency and ultimately failing to grant a business owner due process of law would be appalling, yes. (Didn't happen here, in the end.) Any decent civil liberties attorney would tell you the same thing. That doesn't make the whole counter-protest with giant Facebook graphics about how homosexuality is immoral and such just peachy, though, or just make me less generally sick about all of that yesterday.
    posted by raysmj at 4:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]




    I know what people are saying when they describe culture-war stuff like this as "wedge issues" and suggest that it's distracting us from the really important stuff. I have a great deal in common with a lot of people who are both traditionally religious and given to homophobia. (Hey, a lot of my family, maybe even most of my family, fits right in there.) I think that it would be great if people on the cultural left could talk to, say, midwestern lower middle class Christians about their shared economic interests.

    When I called this a wedge issue earlier - maybe that's what brennen was responding to here, maybe not - I didn't mean that to be dismissive of the importance of the issue. Treating any group of citizens as second class is immoral and unacceptable.

    The problem is that if this and other social issues become the primary focus of our national conversation, we will only become more polarized. We'll never be able to have a conversation between the cultural left and the lower/middle class social conservatives about shared interests and values if we're too busy demonizing each other. At some point while we're out here arguing over this (or whatever other issue winds up replacing it), the problem of income inequality and grossly disproportionate wealth distribution will wind up making second class citizens of all of us.

    What makes me sad here is that I see the problem all too clearly, but I'll be damned if I can come up with anything that even remotely resembles a solution.
    posted by zoog at 4:08 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I try not to comment on Twitter about politics, but it's hard to keep biting my tongue when I see comments like this:

    So, homosexuals are having a "kiss-in" at Chick-Fil-A tomorrow. They'll be going into the restaurants & kissing. Right. Cuz that's mature.

    Bleeearrrrgh.
    posted by suburbanbeatnik at 4:08 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]




    Some pulp sci-fi whose name that I can't recall has a setting that presumes that at some point around the middle of the 21st century the religion pot finally boiled over and humanity fell into a series of wars that lasted nearly 100 years and almost destroyed humanity. In the present-future of the story, everyone is free to believe whatever they want, but because the war was so brutal and so long the social stigma against sharing that outside of your intimate circle is so strong that no one does it. I always thought that was interesting.
    posted by feloniousmonk at 4:10 PM on August 2, 2012


    No one who uses "cuz" is an authority on maturity.
    posted by feloniousmonk at 4:10 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    ericb: "Fox News Host Shep Smith's Chick-fil-A Swipe: 'National Day Of Intolerance'."

    Smith must hate going to work in the morning.
    posted by brundlefly at 4:11 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Well, I guess designating a day to spit on gay people would have been a little too skeezy even for this crowd, so the best they can do is put greasy fried chicken into their own guts.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 4:13 PM on August 2, 2012


    Pullus et circenses.
    posted by feloniousmonk at 4:15 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    We'll never be able to have a conversation between the cultural left and the lower/middle class social conservatives about shared interests and values if we're too busy demonizing each other.

    I don't disagree for a second. And hell, forget my right-wing acquaintances - the cultural & political left spends so much time walking around all knives-out and thirsting for blood over perceived deviations from acceptable doctrine or practice within its own ranks that we have basically nullified ourselves as a real influence, in the American context.

    It's just a damned hard problem, particularly when the real differences between people who would be kindred in spirit in any sane world run as deep as they do.
    posted by brennen at 4:17 PM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    "And it's a politician listening to his constituency that you find chilling. Glorious new day on metafilter."

    Politicians listening to their constituencies still don't get to violate constitutional rights to due process or protected free speech. It is a good thing that Rahm Emmanuel backed down from this shit so that this all can continue to not be a free speech issue.

    "When an alderman refuses to allow a business to open because its owner has expressed a viewpoint the government disagrees with, the government is practicing viewpoint discrimination" -ACLU senior attorney Adam Schwartz
    posted by Blasdelb at 4:20 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    You know who else's right to free speech I fully support? Fred fucking Phelps.

    However, I can assure that I would never dream of buying anything he made were he to hold a bake sale.
    posted by triggerfinger at 4:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Being Gay in Tucson Hurts
    posted by homunculus at 4:24 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    i haven't read the comments yet, but i have a confession to make - on my visits to ft wayne, i've eaten at their restaurant in the mall - i like their chicken sandwiches

    the recent controversy disturbed me somewhat, but generally, i'm not in favor of making political statements with my dollar with merchants, feeling that the amount i spend is fairly insignificant in the scheme of things and more importantly, there probably isn't any way in hell i'm going to spend many of my dollars without supporting someone whose politics are repugnant to me - business people being a conservative bunch - my money's inevitably going to someone i dislike, is the way i look at it

    so i wasn't going to stop eating there the one or two times a year i have a chance to, until now - if they're just going to shove their repugnant views in everyone's face like that and rally people in support of them that blatantly, then they've made buying a chicken sandwich from them a statement in support of their beliefs

    i can't do that
    posted by pyramid termite at 4:29 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Hey! I posted the Friday protest as a MeFi Meetup in case anyone wants to come tomorrow to show support...
    posted by sexyrobot at 4:33 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    enn: This is my favorite picture from yesterday. Apparently their customers will wait in long lines, weathering the blistering summer sun, etc. etc. but by god they sure as shit are not going to step out of their cars and walk ten feet come hell or high water.

    I once worked at a miserable cubicle farm job in Manhattan. I was offered the chance to transfer to Cubicle Farm's manufacturing plant in Warrington, PA. I declined. Now I'm looking at this picture, and I've never been so happy to dodge a fucking bullet in my life.

    Of course, now I live in San Jose, where Chick-fil-A is opening in two weeks, so the joke is on me, I guess. Dammit.
    posted by bakerina at 4:47 PM on August 2, 2012




    Endless lines of people. Not oblivious people going around and not caring about the ethics of the businesses they buy from, but people going out of their way to support an establishment that takes some of that money to deny other human beings their human rights. Many of these people know or interact with gay people. Perhaps their doctor, or lawyer, or coworker of family member or a friend or acquaintance is gay. Perhaps someone they interact with daily.

    How is it possible? Oh, but it is. There's a lesbian couple we've been friends with here in California, for many years. They moved to a small town in a rural area 90 minutes from Los Angeles. They bought a house. They moved specifically to provide services for some needs which are sorely underserved in that area - and in the process took a significant pay cut. They were excellent neighbors and really engaged in the community. Everyone knew they were gay. But when anyone needed help, they didn't care that a gay person helped them. So the couple selflessly helped many, many times and the everyone agreed that the community benefitted immensely by the two nice ladies moving in.

    And then prop 8 rolled around. Every. Single. Lawn. around the lesbians home sprouted political signs in support of prop 8. Every neighbor. Along that street and every other street in the small community.

    We spoke to them not long after, when they came visiting. The sense of betrayal, the punch in the gut, the deep despairing disappointment. What was especially remarkable is how none of the neighbors acted any differently after that - they still came calling for help, or popped in to borrow some sugar or whatever. Friendly smiles, as always. But the sharp edge of the blade was when they'd be told, by their neighbors that "you are different, not like those San Francisco people", "we like you", and "that's just politics". You know, sort of like "we're friends, but business and politics, well, it's business and politics - that's different." Oh, and "it's God's word and we can't go against God, even though we like you very much indeed - hey, I need some sugar, honey, do you have some to spare?".

    So here they are, friendly as ever, completely committed to denying people their most fundamental rights - to marry the love of your life, just as they are allowed themselves. It doesn't cost them anything. It brings them no profit. But they are going out of their way to deny you some of your most fundamental rights.

    All the while smiling, "good Christians" one and all.

    When I was around 10 or so, there was this kid in the neighborhood who tortured animals. Not dogs and cats, but stuff like cutting off snail's eyes with scissors, burning frogs etc. What was striking, was the lack of empathy - other kids would be extremely distressed when he'd do something like that and he'd smile - smile - smile. Not a thrill of perverse pleasure like a film villain, just this smile. The image of that smile is the thing about him that stayed with me the most.

    Many people distrust a certain brand of Christians - the smiling, completely lacking in empathy, the ones who are creepily able to smile to your face and stab you at the same time. I guess after many such experiences you too would be creeped out by these smiling Christian pod people - seemingly normal on the surface, but Body Snatched.
    posted by VikingSword at 5:09 PM on August 2, 2012 [83 favorites]


    …my decision NOT to eat there will be a lot easier and longer lasting than an evangelical's decision to affirmatively spend money there.

    Especially if you are mindful to speak up every time you hear/see the name. "Don't support them, the owner is a dick."
    posted by five fresh fish at 5:12 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Smiling, empathy-lacking sociopaths who believe they've got their ticket to heaven.
    posted by five fresh fish at 5:14 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    It was depressing as fuck to see pictures of all the young people from a youth group in a CFA in the local paper. First comment on the online article was both eye-twitching and amusing: "Mr. Cathy has the right, guaranteed by the blood of our veterans, to say what he want to say and open a chicken restaurant where ever he wants (zoning permitting)."

    I support bigotry! (zoning permitting)
    posted by book 'em dano at 5:35 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Were they also giving out free axe handles?
    posted by MrBadExample at 7:53 PM on August 2 [+] [!]



    WHAT FELL SORCERY IS THIS?
    posted by Mr. Bad Example at 5:36 PM on August 2, 2012


    I heard in SF that you have to get a zoning variance for bigotry. PC run amok!
    posted by feloniousmonk at 5:37 PM on August 2, 2012




    I hope they choke on those disgusting meals.
    posted by clvrmnky at 5:39 PM on August 2, 2012


    "Many people distrust a certain brand of Christians - the smiling, completely lacking in empathy, the ones who are creepily able to smile to your face and stab you at the same time. I guess after many such experiences you too would be creeped out by these smiling Christian pod people - seemingly normal on the surface, but Body Snatched."

    This really has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity. It's everything to do with human tribalism and othering. Almost all people have an amazing capacity to strictly limit the extent of their empathy when it's psychosocially useful for them. I could point to examples by the very most progressive and apparently empathetic mefites here (which I won't because it wouldn't be nice and would cause a derail) even, I'm sure, myself at some time or another.

    And, really, you can see the basic outlines of it and its mechanisms in how contentious threads go here. There's like a switch in our brains where someone is either in-group or out-group and it's not as if every individual person is forever fixed for each of us in one or the other category. We can switch people on a minute-by-minute basis, if necessary. But most especially this is the case with regard to individual, daily interpersonal interactions (where empathy is most likely to be highest and the default in comfortable, familiar situations is to assume other people are in-group) as opposed to abstracted, discursive arguments (where at any sign of conflict at all, anyone who's not a long-time close ally is switched to out-group and empathy drops to near zero).

    Mefites who are hateful to each other here have been known to get along like good friends at meetups in person. Political stuff brings out these contrasts more than almost anything else because by its nature it tends to mix the personal with the abstract and create situations where people switch between the "friendly neighbor" mode and the "political enemy" mode.

    Pretty much most members of certain kinds of groups, political or religious (which means most everyone), will treat you well and be nice to you and smile at you while, in the context of a conflict that plays out in the civil sphere, without hesitation advocate policies that will be personally harmful to you if they believe that you and they are "enemies" in that context. This is not about Christians and other people. It's about people and other people.
    posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 5:41 PM on August 2, 2012 [20 favorites]


    The whole thing makes me wonder if communion was started because of a homophobic baker.
    posted by ifandonlyif at 5:43 PM on August 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


    This thread is making me crave KFC.
    posted by orange swan at 5:57 PM on August 2, 2012


    I've managed to miss the whole uproar about this, in spite of living near the ground zero of CFA in Georgia, because 1) I don't eat nor have ever understood some people's unholy love for the Chick Fil'A and 2) I lived in the same city as Maurice Bessinger for twelve years.

    I mean if you're gonna do hate, as least have the balls to fill half your store with a gift shop for your racist crap. That's some high-test Southern-Bigot Jesus-Freak stuff, right there. Real Columbian Gold. Going to a friendly fundy meeting and saying you don't really support other people... piffle. Weak sauce. Stand up. Wave your hate flag high. Then I'll really know what I'm dealing with.

    Also: I'm not sure if I'm more horrified that this many people apparently don't know how to make good fried chicken at home or if it's because the flash point for intolerance in America seems to not only involve fast food but to actually hinge on it. (Oh, Andy Warhol, would you ever be able to stop laughing?)
    posted by 1f2frfbf at 6:12 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    People aren't born with bigotry, they are taught it. Heck, I remember my brothers coming home from their factory jobs with jokes that nowadays would be considered very politically incorrect. I didn't realize this wasn't cool, until I heard comments here and there from various family members. It made me very uncomfortable.

    I left the Christian faith when I was 16, because I couldn't get how they could say, not let women become priests or if I used birth control I was going to be excommunicated. Then there was the whole gay thing. We used to say "queer," and back then it could mean strange or gay. And gay meant happy.

    I was raised with a whole set of stereotypes and that whole weird "you must be a good girl" thing. I have baggage.

    My husband, however, was never forced to go to church and he became a dancer, because he saw some people doing it and wanted to learn how to jump. Certain family members of mine were astounded that he wasn't gay. He roomed with gay guys in the various companies he worked for, of course, and thought nothing of it, they were just his dance buddies. And when I tried to explain to him the stereotypes and the rules and the abuse and the guilt of the Church, he simply looked at me and said,

    "If I had been raised a Christian, I'd be a Satanist by now."

    Because he had no prior religious upbringing, he simply accepted people for who they were and didn't care what others thought of him. Just did his thing, and he is a very kind and gentle person, loves animals and treats others with respect, gay or not gay does not cross his radar, we are Humans first. The thought of someone telling him that the big invisible man in the sky wants him to hate others is alien to him.

    He did go to church once, out of curiosity. He found it so boring and monotonous that he spent the entire service looking up at the pillars that held up the roof and trying to figure out where would be the best place to plant explosives, ala James Bond or a Super Ninja.
    posted by Marie Mon Dieu at 6:13 PM on August 2, 2012 [18 favorites]


    #husbandbrag
    posted by gilrain at 6:18 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    It continues to sicken me that my rights, as a GLBT person, are "controversial".
    posted by jiawen at 6:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [18 favorites]


    For people Not Of This World (NOTW), they sure like telling the World and those of us in it what to do.
    posted by Celsius1414 at 6:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    My family (me, my wife, and our 4 kids aged 9, 8, 6 and 3) ate dinner at a good Chinese restaurant here in NoVa. I hadn't realized there was a Chick-Fil-A in the same plaza. Oh, yeah -- I'm trans (MTF).

    While approaching the restaurant, the kids were whining, "Where are we going to eat?" Seeing the Chick-Fil-A sign, I helpfully said, "Well, we could eat at the Chick-Fil-A over there." Oldest son (9) immediately starts panicking. "Nooooo! They give money to people who discriminate against gays!" Clearly, we're doing something right there.

    So over dinner, I muse about the protests scheduled for tomorrow. "You know, we could just head over there a little bit early..." So when we finish dinner, we load the kids into the van. I hand my cell phone over the the oldest boy and ask him, "You know how to take pictures with this thing, right?"

    He's a bit confused. Daughter starts burbling up and down, "I can do it! I can do it! I want to do it! Give it to me!" He assents and she grabs the phone.

    We shrug and pull into a parking spot right outside the Chick-Fil-A, and instruct the three boys to stay in the car. Drag the girl into the (ugh, crowded) restaurant. It smells greasy. I notice a wonderfully diverse crowd, including a Moslem family (with the mom wearing a hijab) and a Hispanic grandmotherly type with a few young kids in tow.

    We take the lay of the land. There is a long line (even at 8:30pm) and I don't feel like approaching the counter, so and my wife and I strategically position ourselves in front of a sign with the cows and logos.

    Daughter is waving around my cell phone in camera mode, but she's still confused. "Wait, what am I supposed to take?"

    "Us. Now."

    We start a round of tonsil-hockey to the extreme disapproval of several in the restaurant.

    Daughter instantly lowers the camera. "EWWWWWW!"

    Tonsil-hockey momentarily ceases. "Now, take a picture now."

    She is still confused. "Wait. What am I supposed to do?"

    We give up and walk out.

    We hustle the kid into the car and express our amazement that she didn't even hit the shutter button once. While bemoaning that fact, the Hispanic grandmotherly type leaves the restaurant, and with her eyes shoots daggers into our minivan.

    In retrospect, it was probably a poor choice by designating as our photographer the child who is THE MOST GROSSED OUT by the thought of her parents making out. Uh, lessons learned, I guess.

    posted by TranSubstantial at 6:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [16 favorites]


    I hope they choke on those disgusting meals.

    I'm waiting for the authoritative study on just how many people died inside Chick-Fil-A restaurants yesterday.
    posted by IvoShandor at 6:36 PM on August 2, 2012


    This thread is making me crave KFC.

    Thanks to this thread, I tried the new KFC Bites just now. Being made of actual white meat chicken chunks rather than grayish reconstituted poultry fragments, they're unsurprisingly way better than nuggets, but they don't rise to the level of the Crispy Strip, which for me is the nirvana of disgusting chain deep-fried chicken technology. I love those damn things although (because?) they contain about as much salt as your average deer lick.
    posted by FelliniBlank at 6:47 PM on August 2, 2012


    "I have to be honest about this and get this off my chest: I've become a bigot. I didn't used to be. As a young girl and then a young mother I loved and admired my Christian friends and family. Christians demonstrated against the Vietnam war. They sheltered illegal immigrants. They fed the hungry and visited people in prison. But somehow the last 15 years or so my love and admiration has turned first to disappointment and now to anger. These days finding out that someone I've just met is a Christian is always a shock and a lowers that person in my estimation.
    Sorry. I don't like feeling like this."

    I hear that.

    The FIRST thing that comes into my brain when someone says they are Christian is "BIGOT." Along with "hates gay people," "hates everyone I like," "hates me even if I'm not gay" (I give them plenty of reasons to hate me besides that), and "would probably be dancing with joy to see us all die in a fire." I associate bigotry with the words Jesus, Christ, Christian, cross, all of it. If I come across someone and the first thing they say to me is "I'm ____ and I'm a Christian," I get the hell out as soon as possible. Use of that word immediately means that that person is a horrible human being and should be fled from.

    Which is unfortunate for the poor folks who are, y'know, actually nice, non-bigoted Christians. Or for the Jesus himself, who I really don't think was a total douche and wouldn't have been cool with this shit at all. I know Mefi's Own jscalzi calls the bigots "Leviticans," (er, I may have the spelling of this wrong...) which is a good word for it, but alas, hasn't really caught on. At this point I suspect the non-bigots need to change their name, because the word "Christian" has been shat on mightily.
    posted by jenfullmoon at 6:57 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    The water is muddy. Fine.

    Hey, Mike, what if, instead of "gay," Cathy had used the word "Black"?

    Free speech, my ass. It's not about free speech.

    Huh? Yes, it is the same thing. You just gotta pick the right bandwagon, I guess.

    Anyhow, folks, don't boycott Chikafilia. Eat there, don't raise a fuss, but make sure you tell the cashier that you don't blame him/her for the boss being such a dickhead. Use appropriate language, so that you defuse the indignant response by your civility. The best street theatre is that which engages the onlookers, not that which reviles those who aren't in tune with the message.

    Use other devices and other venues for creating polemics among the onlookers, if you simply must bang your head against it.

    I can't believe nobody here's done a riff on Chikafilia. Maybe this fruit just hangs too low.
    posted by mule98J at 7:01 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Real Christians practice what was "written in Red" (KJV). "Love one Another" was written in Red. That's what I'll do.
    posted by pearlybob at 7:05 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    You gotta know that had the owner of this fast-food chain said the opposite -- that he supported gay rights -- Mike Huckabee and the conservatives who lined up in yesterday's heat would have put the whole "free enterprise and freedom of speech" line in the deep-fryer. It's not about eating chicken for freedom, despite how they want to justify their oppression and fear.
    posted by crunchland at 7:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [6 favorites]


    0xFCAF: "Let's be clear: People are not concerned with CFA's beliefs or statements, so much as they are concerned about their actions. For example, spending $25,000 to lobby Congress not to condemn Uganda's legislation mandating the death penalty for homosexuality.

    They are spending money in favor of genocide against homosexuals. That's not hyperbole, that is literally what is going on here.
    "

    I posted this to Facebook, and my friend who's an openly-gay African policy wonk (and quite horrified by the Ugandan bill) wrote this in response:
    Not to nitpick, but that graphic shows that the FRC lobbied Congress not to condemn Uganda's bill. I'm not sure if I would say "in favor of genocide" based on that (also, the proposed bill is constitutionally inoperable--the Ugandan constitution is quite restrictive on the use of the death penalty, and Uganda has not carried out a judicial execution in ten years and likely never will again. I really find a lot of the hype about a gay genocide in Africa to be based on the worst stereotypes of the continent of Africa). Chick-fil-A DID give a $1,000 donation to Exodus International, the organization credited with putting on the workshop that produced the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, but that's not even mentioned in this article.

    According to the FRC, they only lobbied Congress to take out the line that they believe implied homosexual conduct was a fundamental human right.
    Take this however you will. I don't trust the FRC as far as I can throw them, but the guy who wrote this is generally a pretty good authority on these matters, and I believe in having an informed debate.
    posted by schmod at 7:40 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]




    I can't believe I'm recalling the neverending media circus surrounding Penn State with a certain element of fondness now. Man, the media really gets every. little. bit. out of every maddening story it can. It's like a parasitic human version of those toothpaste tube flateners. All I know is I don't ever want to hear about this story again. The owner can hold whatever beliefs he wants regardless of whether they're well-meaning or not. Everyone can stop being so involved in what everyone else is thinking and doing and just concern themselves with themselves. We can all eat wherever we want to eat in peace. And the media can stop adding fuel to the flame. [My opinion? I'm ashamed that this is the only thing that is newsworthy in the US. I'm ashamed for the media. I'm ashamed for the people involved. I'm ashamed with the average American who has nothing better to think about. Meanwhile, we don't know ANYTHING about what's going on in other countries because we're so obsessed with this junk.]
    posted by Mael Oui at 7:59 PM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    I'm amused by the people who still think this is a free speech issue.

    When the mayor of a city wants to deny a privately owned business a license to operate, solely because of the opinions of some of the company's officers, it's very much a free speech issue, and it should chill you. By god, if as a nation we say that Fred Phelps' speech must be protected, then we damn well better protect the free speech of a backward old restaurant owner who doesn't like "the gays."
    posted by jbickers at 4:30 PM on August 2


    That's a bit of putting the 'chicken before the egg', no? Timeline rules apply - said bigotry happened before said grandstanding. It was, and still is, an issue of bigotry, homophobia, and downright hatred. Blowhard politicians allowed it to be turned into a free speech issue.
    posted by matty at 8:05 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Jon Stewart on this topic:

    "What better way to stand up and say "I oppose gay people's right to get married" than to head down to a Chick-fil-A, grab ahold of two buttery buns, split 'em open and gobble down some of that hot juicy cock."
    posted by hippybear at 8:06 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    It's like a parasitic human version of those toothpaste tube flatteners.

    This is the most succinct and accurate distillation of the 24-hour news cycle that I have ever read.
    posted by Devils Rancher at 8:22 PM on August 2, 2012 [4 favorites]



    I just lost an hour to Stuff Christian Culture Likes, linked in that blog. Unsparing!

    Damn you!
    posted by Jalliah at 8:25 PM on August 2, 2012


    Until frat boys tease each other about going to CFA, ha ha, what are you, gay? Trying to pick up some dudes, eh, bro?

    I like the idea of making them eat there every day. "Bro, you haven't been to Chik-fil-A today. You ain't gay, are you?" A fear of humiliation and heart disease.

    It must be 20 years since I was in a CFA last. Never been hard to find good fried chicken in my area.
    posted by octobersurprise at 8:33 PM on August 2, 2012


    Someone please please please please please tell me that the slogan for the pro-gay-rights, anti-Chick-Fil-a protest will be "Eat Mor Kock."
    posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:35 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I love CFA's food. Now I can't eat in good conscience.

    Why couldn't it have been Taco Bell?
    posted by double block and bleed at 8:38 PM on August 2, 2012


    Kind of a derail, but I'd like to thank the Stuff Christian Culture Likes blog, linked above, for calling out that whole "love the sinner, hate the sin" canard, which I've long had an issue with.

    Not the "love the sinner" part, mind you, but the "hate the sin" part. I don't claim to be a biblical expert, but from what I know of it I am unable to find any biblical support to "hate the sin."

    It says to avoid sin, to be sure. But that's not the same as hating sin. By way of analogy: if you are on a diet, you might well avoid chocolate cake. But you can avoid chocolate cake without hating chocolate cake.
    posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:45 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    According to the FRC, they only lobbied Congress to take out the line that they believe implied homosexual conduct was a fundamental human right.

    Oh, well, that's a relief! I feel much better about that now.
    posted by rtha at 8:47 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Hey! Remember this, like, just over a month ago?

    Yeah. Cathy's statement was no accident. Quotes from that linked article say things like "why can't companies just stay neutral about these things?" I wonder if the person so angry at the rainbow oreo wished that Cathy had "stayed neutral" here.And I think the answer is "of course not."

    Just like, you know, how of course this isn't a free speech issue. Tom Merino was careful to not claim any personal or official capacity to refuse Chick-Fil-A a permit, as can be seen in his letter to Cathy. (I'm not as familiar with Rahm Emanuel's dealings on the issue.) Even so, the ACLU stepped in and cleared everything up there, but the right isn't interested in an honest debate on free speech even if that were the issue, as shown by things like Palin's claiming that the boycott creates a "chilling effect" (a term of art in free speech issues) on Cathy's first amendment rights. They just want noise and outrage.

    Perhaps most importantly, they want a medium for mass action. Conservatives, perhaps bizarrely to those of us here, but not to them, have been feeling very powerless these past several years. They won on Prop 8, but have repeatedly lost on it in the courts since then (and just yesterday, I believe, filed for cert to SCOTUS.) They've been losing on SSM in other states as well, and when they've been "winning" it's been clear that the victory is only barely staying the tide (like in Maryland and Maine.) They lost on healthcare (in their perspective) and just lost on it again in the courts. They "lost" on the birther issue. The guy they hate got bin Laden, after their guy couldn't. And even if all of this seems silly, it's all been packaged for them as them being oppressed and having no power. They got together and formed the Tea Party and went to the town hall meetings and for what? Nothing they did mattered.

    Huckabee and Cathy gave them an action. Something they could do in their hometown. Cathy made his chicken restaurant the Official Fast Food Sponsor of GOP 2012, and of course they came out in support.

    (Likewise, from what I'm seeing there were also a ton of super-virulent homophobes talking to the cashiers about their views. This also isn't shocking. Give people with hateful opinions a time and place to go to spout them off around like-minded folks and it turns out they'll show up.)

    Anyway, it's an important issue (probably the most important issue to me, politically, and I'm a straight guy) but it's also our wedge issue for the next hundred days, because the GOP is way better at making those and having Romney sing economy is a really bad fit.

    That's why this is a story.
    posted by Navelgazer at 9:07 PM on August 2, 2012 [8 favorites]


    it's just more easy to memetically equate "Chick" with "Christ"

    These guys couldn't agree more.
    posted by Rykey at 9:10 PM on August 2, 2012


    People are such idiots. It's fuckin' chicken, people, not the Holy Sacrament.

    Assuming there is a God, my take is that you won't get into heaven with a hard heart and greasy fingers.
    posted by BlueHorse at 9:21 PM on August 2, 2012


    Finally something we can all agree on.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 9:23 PM on August 2, 2012 [7 favorites]


    I've got a friend who said something on twitter about not eating at Chick Fil A because they hurt people he cares about and the responses he got back (and retweeted) from random strangers were horrible abuse (misogynistic & homophobic) that apparently got one of the accounts involved suspended. I'm a subscriber to Greater Internet Dickwad Theory, but this surprised even me.

    I'm generally in the "when we eat fast food, we're contributing to enough social/environmental/etc. ills that one more doesn't matter" camp, but this is just ridiculous. If you want to make yourself the poster chain for bigotry, you can't complain when people don't want to eat your food. As for me, I guess I'll just have to eat Mrs P's Electric Cock instead.
    posted by immlass at 9:44 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I find myself wondering: how do we know they *actually* had record turnout? I mean, at the end of the day, the only people who know how much business they did that day is Chik-Fil-A, and what are they going to do, announce an appreciation day and then say they didn't have record turnout/say nothing?

    Fuck, it could have been the worst day they had all month, and the worst month they've had all year, and the worst year they've had since inception, and they would still have trumpeted their amazing sales numbers on their appreciation day. They don't have to publicly report anything, so it is a Public Relations 101 no-brainer, really.

    similarly: if you throw an event and nobody -- like, not even one person -- shows up, you claim that you were absolutely packed. Nobody was there to know that you're lying.
    posted by davejay at 9:53 PM on August 2, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I'm a subscriber to Greater Internet Dickwad Theory, but this surprised even me.

    When people behave in indefensible ways, they respond in strange ways when they're "forced" to confront their own behavior, even by a comment from a stranger on the internet that isn't directed at them. Projecting self-loathing outward is a fun hobby, I guess.
    posted by davejay at 9:55 PM on August 2, 2012


    Such intolerance boggles me. Gay rights hurt no-one and yet they still manage to find it in their hearts to hold such hate. Chick-fil-a can say goodbye to my business for life, they won't be missed.
    posted by arcticseal at 9:55 PM on August 2, 2012


    Davejay, the ones here certainly did. Mindbogglingly so.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 10:01 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Also, I have to note, the real Los Pollos Hermanos website is kind of weird.
    posted by jiawen at 10:11 PM on August 2, 2012


    I came back just to tell one quick story, which may be neither here nor there, but it feels relevant to me.

    The night the health care ruling came down, 3 friends and I went down to the Supreme Court building to celebrate on the steps. We were, we were surprised to find out, the only ones there. Well, the only ones aside from a group of thirty-forty people of all ages engaged in a circle of prayer.

    It was pretty clear that they were involved in a prayer for SCOTUS to, I don't know, start acting more in line with God's view of Republican doctrine? In my heady church-going days as a teenager I'd seen such things. Kids praying for God to remove Clinton from office, stuff like that. So this raised my hackles a bit.

    We stayed far enough away from it to be "respectful," but my friends, who were a little drunk anyway, made a point of, well, not yelling at the prayer circle, but talking very loudly about how great the decision was and how great a day this was and all of that (one of the friends there co-ran Law Students for Reproductive Justice with Sandra Fluke, so you can guess her level of emotion on this matter, what with the birth control mandate and all of that.)

    Eventually the group was dispersing as an officer with the Capitol Police came up and we started chatting with him. We discussed the ruling and all of that, and then asked what this prayer group was about.

    He explained that it was a group that makes a sort of pilgrimage to the SCOTUS steps every year at this time, to pray for the end of the death penalty.

    Not everybody is what we think they might be, and we don't know everything, no metter how deep our experience.
    posted by Navelgazer at 10:29 PM on August 2, 2012 [30 favorites]


    I wish there was one of these places near where I live just so I could go there, order their chicken, then make out with my partner right outside their restaurant (on public property, of course).

    I'm ashamed that I've ever eaten there at all, but to answer so many questions---they are just another fast food joint that focuses on chicken rather than beef. They are mildly healthier/tastier than KFC but the food isn't anything special.

    The fact that people will purposely scarf down waist-expanding fast food, just for the validation regarding their intolerant ways, says a lot about our country. They should get a clue... the LBGTQ community isn't sitting around allowing themselves to be bullied anymore. Everyone should get equal rights and I'm very happy to see the community becoming so passionate/vocal about it. Maybe this is the unifying event of the 'Me' generation...
    posted by stubbehtail at 10:45 PM on August 2, 2012


    "Also, I have to note, the real Los Pollos Hermanos website is kind of weird."

    I think they're trying to say that they support defense troops in this war on drugs. With American made "trauma bags" to meet your needs, satisfaction guaranteed.


    [/derail]
    posted by iamkimiam at 10:54 PM on August 2, 2012


    Also...from a business standpoint, it seems ridiculous to alienate such a large portion of the population who has tremendous purchasing power. The gay community generally doesn't have the expenses 'traditional' families do--who need to raise/care for children. Not to say gay families don't exist, but the buying power comes from the overwhelming majority who do not have children.

    So...yeah, today they'll have all their straight, 'traditional' families pouring money into them. But times are tough, school is around the corner, and when those families have to put money elsewhere for their children, who do they expect to keep them afloat?
    posted by stubbehtail at 11:00 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Chick-Fil-Approval Plummets
    YouGov BrandIndex measurement scores range from 100 to -100 and are compiled by subtracting negative feedback from positive. A zero score means equal positive and negative feedback.

    On July 16th, the day the Baptist Press published its Dan Cathy interview, Chick-Fil-A's Index score was 65, a very substantial 19 points above the Top National QSR Sector average score that day of 46.

    Four days later, Chick-Fil-A had fallen to 47 score, three points below the Top National QSR Sector average score of 50. This past Wednesday, Chick-Fil-A had a 39 score compared to the Top National QSR Sector average score of 43.
    Win the BATTLE ; lose the WAR.
    posted by ericb at 11:18 PM on August 2, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Holy crap. The LA Times is saying that the chief spokesman for Chick-Fil-A just died of a sudden heart attack. I double-checked to make sure this wasn't the Onion.

    Wow, that sucks terribly. Poor guy. Might be pure coincidence, but I'm thinking it wasn't, and this mess sure as heck wasn't his fault.
    posted by Malor at 11:30 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Oh, goodness. The memes will be brutal.
    posted by Burhanistan at 11:35 PM on August 2, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Holy crap. The LA Times is saying that the chief spokesman for Chick-Fil-A just died of a sudden heart attack. I double-checked to make sure this wasn't the Onion.

    As was noted in the earlier Chick-Fil-A thread.
    posted by ericb at 11:43 PM on August 2, 2012


    So I'll admit it here: I really like eating at Chick-fil-A. I'm not a big fan of fast food in general, but I have little kids who are picky eaters and I frequently have limited time and money and you know, I can go to the Chick-fil-A and get some decent food that isn't drowning in fat sauce that everyone will just eat without complaining. The chicken is good; the kids' meals come with fruit. And in the market niche of "quick food for under $5/person", Chick-fil-A is (at least in my area) head and shoulders above the rest of the competition. The restaurants are spotless. The play areas are great. The employees never seem to suffer from the usual fast-food surliness. Usually there is a manager roaming the floor, diplomatically checking that everyone is happy and offering to refill drinks.

    On my daily commute there are a Hardee's, a Chick-fil-A, and a Burger King, in a row right next to each other. The three buildings have about the same number of seats, comparable menus, comparable prices. The Hardee's and the Burger King are always empty (even at lunchtime) and the Chick-fil-A is always full. But the Chick-fil-A is managed so much better than its neighbors that it's usually the quickest place to go, even if there's a line. It's a great place for eating.

    But if Chick-fil-A is going to apply this organizational prowess to perpetuating historical bigotries, I'm done with them. There's more to life than eating quickly.
    posted by fantabulous timewaster at 11:44 PM on August 2, 2012


    Man, I bet if one were to try to put together a team to create a restaurant which included all of those qualities that people love about Chick-Fil-A, without the political issues they didn't, they could find the people with the time and drive on a site like this...
    posted by Navelgazer at 12:04 AM on August 3, 2012


    Regarding Mayor Emanuel wanting to block a Chick-Fil-A from opening in Chicago's first ward - He's said "Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values", but I believe it's Alderman Moreno that is attempting to stop the restaurant from opening. "Moreno is relying on a rarely violated Chicago tradition known as aldermanic privilege, which dictates that City Council members defer to the opinion of the ward alderman on local issues."
    posted by youngergirl44 at 12:29 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I read (in Chicago Reader, other places) that it's also a sort-of giveaway--a zoning variance that would allow the company to tear down an old building next door. So in this case Chick-Fil-A is asking for a favor. Is that correct? Anyone from Chicago who's kept up? I'd said to others earlier that if subsidies or a new turn lane or any of the usual economic development goodies were talked about here, I wouldn't have a problem with a variance being denied. But I'm not sure if a giveaway was to be happening here, or if it were standard practice.

    In any case, CFA food is cheap, yes, but you're not going to pay under $5 for a meal there, unless you just get a regular sandwich alone or you're getting breakfast foods (which are less expensive everywhere). A typical menu. Traditional, drive-through-enabled fast food is pricier than some not-quite-as-fast or sit-in-but-still-quick places these days, has been for a while.
    posted by raysmj at 12:54 AM on August 3, 2012


    From the article I linked in my previous comment, "Chick-fil-A already has obtained zoning for a restaurant in the 2500 block of North Elston Avenue, but it must seek council approval to divide the land so it can purchase an out lot near Home Depot". And since the city council traditionally sides with the local alderman, it looks like we won't be getting a Chick-Fil-A anytime soon.

    This whole thing is crappy all around. Can't we just get along? Because I really want a chicken sandwich. Please?
    posted by youngergirl44 at 1:05 AM on August 3, 2012


    A zoning permit is not the same thing as a zoning variance. I'm not a attorney, or an urban planner (although I have studied urban govt. in PoliSci and public admin.), but the usual thing there has to do with whether the property that's being torn down could be proven useful in any other way. Is that the case here, or not? The article doesn't address that question (and I have seen it suggested elsewhere that this is a growing neighborhood--I don't live in Chicago and have no idea about that, 'cept what I've read, and what I'm reading is all general).
    posted by raysmj at 1:18 AM on August 3, 2012


    Huckabee and Cathy gave them an action. Something they could do in their hometown. Cathy made his chicken restaurant the Official Fast Food Sponsor of GOP 2012, and of course they came out in support.

    This is why I think the big turn-out to show appreciation for C-f-l is so humorous. Nobody is sacrificing anything. Nobody is being asked to put themselves out for the cause, or to suck-up a little discomfort. The big rally centered on driving your car to a restaurant and buying some cheap food and eating it. Whoop-di-doo! What would the response look like if supporters of Cathy's position were asked to drive down to C-F-L and give them $5.00 for the cause and receive nothing in return? What about if the supporters were asked to drive to C-F-L and stand in solidarity for 8 hours in the sun?

    Yeah, color me Not Impressed Pink.
    posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:37 AM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    it's also our wedge issue for the next hundred days, because the GOP is way better at making those and having Romney sing economy is a really bad fit.

    He might be hoist by his own chicken. Because if Romney wants to win, it should be the economy, stupid, for the next hundred days, not the Olympics, chicken, and Did-I-Or-Didn't-I-Pay-My-Taxes.

    Cathy made his chicken restaurant the Official Fast Food Sponsor of GOP 2012, and of course they came out in support.

    I'ma start a "UR GAY IF YOU DON'T EAT CHICK-FIL-A!!" campaign. A Chick-Fil-A for every meal and we might be rid of the Tea Party by Christmas.
    posted by octobersurprise at 6:28 AM on August 3, 2012


    Oh my. Victoria Jackson goes to Chick-Fil-A.
    posted by octobersurprise at 6:54 AM on August 3, 2012


    There are no doubt many conservatives who are horrified that their party has been hijacked (hence the oft cited "Bill Clinton was the best Republican President in recent years" idea as the Democrats are pretty much right of centre fiscally at least).

    Many Christians (such a broad term of course) must be equally horrified at this nonsense.

    A massive "bigotry yeah!" demonstration is so sad that words do indeed fail.
    posted by juiceCake at 7:23 AM on August 3, 2012


    Victoria Jackson goes to Chick-Fil-A

    I hope you're not surprised - she's been a grotesque fundie for a long time now.
    posted by elizardbits at 7:45 AM on August 3, 2012 [5 favorites]


    I'm kind of grossed out by the folks here and elsewhere sniveling about "But, but, I want a chicken sandwich!" Maybe they're meaning to be funny, but I think it's just gross that there needs to be any dithering at all. "Give my money to hate-mongers? Fuck that noise!" seems like it should be a no-brainer.

    CFA ain't the only chicken sammich in town, and it's not the best one, either. If you want a chicken sammich so desperately, come to my house and I will make you one with fresh organic ingredients, homemade chips...and no hate.
    posted by MissySedai at 8:22 AM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    So here is where I am confused, I don't understand how Dan Cathy's comments are directly leading to a discriminatory and hostile work environment for it's gay and lesbian employees. I thought employees were still protected federally if it is a private company.
    posted by iamabot at 8:28 AM on August 3, 2012


    Victoria Jackson also believes that Obama is a Muslim and a Communist and is suspiciously similar to the Antichrist, that America is in danger of being put under Sharia law, and that UFOs exist but are demons.

    This is the company one keeps when supporting Chick-Fil-A. The lesson learned: You lie down with dogs, you get up with Victoria Jackson.
    posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 8:35 AM on August 3, 2012 [8 favorites]


    So, Jackson and Dennis Miller both got some sort of meningitis on the set of SNL, yes? Poor sods.
    posted by Burhanistan at 8:36 AM on August 3, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Well, Chic-Fil-A does everything they can to only hire Christians, and Christians who agree with their culture at that. This is a thorough overview of their practices. I'm sorry for the long quote, but I don't think people realize Chic-Fil-A is guilty of far more than having a bigot as its CEO.
    Loyalty to the company isn't the only thing that matters to Cathy, who wants married workers, believing they are more industrious and productive. One in three company operators have attended Christian-based relationship-building retreats through WinShape at Berry College in Mount Berry, Ga. The programs include classes on conflict resolution and communication. Family members of prospective operators--children, even--are frequently interviewed so Cathy and his family can learn more about job candidates and their relationships at home. "If a man can't manage his own life, he can't manage a business," says Cathy, who says he would probably fire an employee or terminate an operator who "has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members."

    The parent company asks people who apply for an operator license to disclose marital status, number of dependents and involvement in "community, civic, social, church and/or professional organizations."

    But Danielle Alderson, 30, a Baltimore operator, says some fellow franchisees find that Chick-fil-A butts into its workers' personal lives a bit much. She says she can't hire a good manager who, say, moonlights at a strip club because it would irk the company. "We are watched very closely by Chick-fil-A," she says. "It's very weird."

    Is it legal? There are no federal laws that prohibit companies from asking nosy questions about religion and marital status during interviews. Most companies don't because it can open them up to discrimination claims, says James Ryan, a spokesman for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Chick-fil-A has more freedom to ask whatever it wants of franchisees because they are independent contractors and not necessarily subject to federal employment discrimination laws. (Employees, however, may sue under those laws.)

    Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms.

    The company might face more suits if it didn't screen potential hires and operators so carefully. Many Chick-fil-A job candidates must endure a yearlong vetting process that includes dozens of interviews. Ty Yokum, the training manager for the chain, sat through 7 interviews and didn't get the job. He reapplied in 1991 and was subjected to another 17 interviews--the final one lasted five hours--and was hired. Bureon Ledbetter, Chick-fil-A's general counsel, says the company works hard to select people like Yokum, who "fit." "We want operators who support the values here," Ledbetter says.
    posted by gilrain at 8:37 AM on August 3, 2012 [14 favorites]


    I hope you're not surprised

    More like delighted. The graphics, the shaky-cam, her squeaky voice, the topic—it's like some weird SNL skit that never was. I just wish there were more headstands.
    posted by octobersurprise at 8:39 AM on August 3, 2012


    Appearances matter. Call it shallow or arbitrary or unfair, but it's how the world works. Armed with that knowledge, you can make an informed decision about what you want your counterprotest to say. If you think the Satan shirt will make you "more noticeable," so be it. It's your counterprotest and I support your right to stage it effectively or not, but I would think you'd want to stage it effectively.
    Sounds suspiciously like the Tone Argument to me. "We'd listen if you were just nicer about it."
    There are no guarantees that J. Random Christian (protester or bystander) will listen to you if you "were just nicer about it," but it's nearly guaranteed that she will not listen to you if you have a "Teach your kids to worship Satan" t-shirt on.
    posted by cosmic.osmo at 8:41 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    "Teach your kids to worship Satan Seitan"
    posted by octobersurprise at 8:48 AM on August 3, 2012 [6 favorites]


    I went to Arby's last night for dinner, which is directly next to a Chick-Fil-A (in front of the Target on Westheimer in Houston). So many people were lined up in the drive-thru that it was affecting traffic and business at the Arby's. I saw more than the usual number of pickup trucks with magnetic signs on the back showing off misspelled Bible verses.

    Supposedly today is "Pride Protest Day" at CFA locations. I don't personally swing that way, but I'm *so* tempted to find some guy friends and all go make out with each other in the CFA parking lot, *just because*.

    My problem is with CFA's anti-LGBT activism, and the official *company* position on things like same-sex marriages. I don't care what the employees or executives think; everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. However, I do have a problem with the company as a whole having an official policy or statement on pretty much anything other than the subject of DELICIOUS FRIED CHICKEN.

    I'll miss the Spicy Chicken Breakfast Burrito and the sweet tea, but I'd rather have the love and respect of my LGBT friends.
    posted by mrbill at 8:57 AM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Incidentally, I have a fairly close Christian acquaintance who was hired at Chic-fil-A, and the A#1 thing she loves about it is that it's like going to youth group. Everyone is a Christian, everyone group-prays before starting work, and everyone is there because they're Christians and want to work for such a Christian company.

    This is a Chic-fil-A in western KY, and results may vary, but it's very telling just how psyched she is to work for an all-Christian company.

    Also, by all accounts they treat the employees they do deem acceptable to hire very, very well. I guess that's nice. For those of the right religion.
    posted by gilrain at 9:11 AM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Burhanistan: "So, Jackson and Dennis Miller both got some sort of meningitis on the set of SNL, yes? Poor sods."

    The thing with Miller, if you were a fan of his work before 9/11, you could at least see how he could have shifted gears to support the War on Terror. He was already a war hawk and self-identified as a conservative libertarian. It's clear that in the first couple of years at least, his support of the Republicans came from a willingness to give up civil liberties in the pursuit of safety. Listen to his pro-death penalty rant from the 90's. Philosophically, he didn't have to travel far at all to a position of "They attacked us. If nuking 'em back to the stone age keeps us from being attacked again, then I'm all for it."

    By contrast, Jackson is just a hate-mongering bigot.
    posted by zarq at 9:23 AM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    So just out of curiosity, does anyone know how many times the Bible forbids homosexuality, and how many times it forbids gluttony?
    posted by mullingitover at 9:47 AM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I think I understand the twisted thinking of the "Focus on the Family" and other "traditional family values" types. They really can't articulate why they feel the way they do, but I think it goes something like this:

    "Right now my spouse and all my kids are normal looking and acting and so toe the partyline of my religious affiliation. However, I know that there's a good chance someone in my family is just barely being held in line and really may be itching to let themselves out of this narrow box we're in, in which case I'll be humiliated and won't be able to face all my other fundy friends. If it becomes acceptable to be gay or lesbian or to be an atheist or member of [that other religion we all hate], they may be encouraged to make a break for it. The only chance I have is to make sure that gays and lesbians can't marry legally to reinforce how unacceptable it is to be homosexual and that everyone understands [that other religion we all hate] is evil and not really a religion."

    I think this is what they must mean when they say they're defending traditional marriage or traditional family values. They really are afraid little Johnny might start kissing boys if same-sex marriage becomes acceptable. Of course, intelligent people can see this is nonsense. Johnny will kiss boys regardless if he is so inclined, in the closet if necessary, and homosexuality is rapidly becoming universally accepted in this country. But the fear of that humiliation won't allow them to think clearly or let go of the fear. So we have these fearful masses trying to "protect traditional marriage" through whatever irrational arguments they can muster without actually mentioning their deepest fear. It is very sad.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 9:48 AM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    There are no guarantees that J. Random Christian (protester or bystander) will listen to you if you "were just nicer about it," but it's nearly guaranteed that she will not listen to you if you have a "Teach your kids to worship Satan" t-shirt on.

    Anti-same-sex marriage people of all religious persuasions would do well to keep this in mind when they're claiming that gay marriage will destroy the family, bring about the downfall of the nation, cause hurricanes, etc. If their sole argument against granting people civil rights is "Because (my version) of God doesn't like it!", they need a better argument. But since there isn't one, they tell lies instead.
    posted by rtha at 10:08 AM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I think it is just so astoundingly bizarre that the question for many is "Would I rather have the respect and mutual support of my fellow humans (some of whom I might be related to) or a chicken sandwich?"

    And they choose the chicken sandwich. I hope they choke on it.
    posted by iamkimiam at 10:18 AM on August 3, 2012 [7 favorites]


    EatMorEquality.com.
    posted by ericb at 10:28 AM on August 3, 2012


    The Kiss In has started.
    posted by ericb at 10:30 AM on August 3, 2012


    It is possible that some of the people waiting in line were waiting to criticize the company rather than ordering. Although....it's possible to go too far with that...
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:37 AM on August 3, 2012


    So just out of curiosity, does anyone know how many times the Bible forbids homosexuality, and how many times it forbids gluttony?

    I thought I saw it here, but apparently not. It's something like 4 to 17.
    posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 10:40 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I think I understand the twisted thinking of the "Focus on the Family"

    Don't forget the minority of FotF types who are thinking, as an old post I can't find put it, "I'm a normal, straight guy who loves his wife, and like all normal, straight guys I constantly crave cock..."
    posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:46 AM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    There are no guarantees that J. Random Christian (protester or bystander) will listen to you if you "were just nicer about it," but it's nearly guaranteed that she will not listen to you if you have a "Teach your kids to worship Satan" t-shirt on.

    Great! The gay rights movement has never had an ounce of support from close-minded Christians who are afraid of band t-shirts, and its success or failure does not depend on them, either. Framing every single protest in Christian terms will not do a damned thing to support anyone... except those who want to believe that Christian terms are the only terms.

    Let each protest in their own way.
    posted by vorfeed at 10:56 AM on August 3, 2012 [5 favorites]


    ChurchHatesTucker: " I thought I saw it here, but apparently not. It's something like 4 to 17."

    Amusingly enough, the numbers are different for the Torah than they are for Christian Bibles.
    posted by zarq at 10:57 AM on August 3, 2012


    So just out of curiosity, does anyone know how many times the Bible forbids homosexuality, and how many times it forbids gluttony?

    We'd first have to decide whether you meant the current pop-culture definition of gluttony (which is basically just overeating), or the old-school, theological meaning of gluttony (which is, roughly, overindulging in anything which would be fine in moderation). For example, there's a number of prohibitions against drunkenness which would fit the older meaning of gluttony but not the current colloquial one.
    posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:58 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I mean, it's as if you think all possible bystanders are "J. Random Christian". Some aren't, so it's good strategy to send a few messages which speak to them as opposed to Mr. Christian. Plenty of protesters send Christian-friendly messages, after all.
    posted by vorfeed at 11:02 AM on August 3, 2012


    Don't forget the minority of FotF types who are thinking, as an old post I can't find put it, "I'm a normal, straight guy who loves his wife, and like all normal, straight guys I constantly crave cock..."

    I'm probably not the only person who's suggested it here but here's a thing I said.
    posted by shakespeherian at 11:09 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Oh shakespeherian, didn't that comment have enough favorites?

    One more can't hurt. <3
    posted by gilrain at 11:29 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Oh you.
    posted by shakespeherian at 11:31 AM on August 3, 2012


    Don't forget the minority of FotF types who are thinking, as an old post I can't find put it, "I'm a normal, straight guy who loves his wife, and like all normal, straight guys I constantly crave cock..."

    Oh, yeah, they're not only part of the mix and a minority, but they are the most passionate and vocal of the group, and probably not a minority of the leadership. Yet there is a majority that seem just fine with the persecution of homosexuals, and I don't think they are all closeted gays. I think this shameful fear that one of their kids or spouse might come out if it became too acceptable to society at large.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 11:35 AM on August 3, 2012


    I think it is this shamefu
    posted by Mental Wimp at 11:38 AM on August 3, 2012


    Is this restaurant even any good? Or is it just typical fast food chicken fare?

    It is the most delicious fast food chicken I've ever eaten, sadly. It also offers educational books for children with their kid's meals, instead of fluffy toys.

    It has astonished me how many people have basically lost friends over this topic, if my Facebook feed is to be believed. It's not like there haven't been gay-rights social media kerfuffles before, but this one is bringing out the knives.

    Yeah, this aspect is one of the shittiest of all. When you become part of an echo chamber of whatever variety, you grow more intolerant of opposing ideas.

    Sometimes people are eating at Chick-Fil-A not because they hate the gays, but because they want the best low-cost food for themselves and their family. I don't think those people deserve to be yelled at or hated. I support gay rights and gay marriage, but I don't like being bullied down to what food I can or can't eat if I want to be a "real" LGBT ally.
    posted by corb at 11:43 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Amusingly enough, the numbers are different for the Torah than they are for Christian Bibles.

    How?
    posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:45 AM on August 3, 2012


    It is the most delicious fast food chicken I've ever eaten

    "It is the most delicious puddle of vomit I have ever licked out of the gutter!"
    posted by Sys Rq at 11:47 AM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]




    The original "constantly crave cock" thing; it was TheophileEscargot's
    posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:51 AM on August 3, 2012


    'Bullied' may have been a poor choice of words. For reasons.
    posted by shakespeherian at 11:51 AM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]






    ChurchHatesTucker: " How?"

    There are only two injunctions against men "laying with" other men in the Torah, not four. Both are in Leviticus. There is no mention of lesbianism in the Torah. There is a reference to it in the Talmud, the Sanhedrin, I believe. But that's an injunction against women who have lain with other women marrying a Kohen, a Jewish priest. So you can be a lesbian, you just can't marry a priest. Over the years, rabbis did forbid lesbian sex but there's no clear basis for it in the Torah.

    Gluttony is a weird topic. There are numerous examples of people behaving like gluttons being shown as poor examples, but there are few overt injunctions against such behavior. The Torah says Jews aren't supposed to eat forbidden foods or commit adultery or incest. But there really aren't rules that say you can't eat like a pig, drink until you pass out, or have sex like rabbits. You're supposed to be "holy," but it's a term that's not particularly well defined. You have to look at later writings and Talmudic interpretations to see rabbis talking about eschewing hedonism.
    posted by zarq at 12:11 PM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]




    The discussion of CFA's food makes me a little uneasy, since it's typical of right wing conservative bigots to assert a direct causal relationship between the quality of their food/restaurants and the nature of their beliefs.

    I don't think anyone is asserting this, but the quality of food is relevant, I think, to the nature of a boycott. Boycotting something you don't use is masturbatory, as is eating somewhere that you like to eat in support of something.
    posted by corb at 12:14 PM on August 3, 2012


    "Westboro Baptist Church: We Hat Fags. We Support Chick-fil-A."

    This is my surprised face.
    posted by ericb at 12:16 PM on August 3, 2012


    *Hate*
    posted by ericb at 12:16 PM on August 3, 2012


    ericb: "*Hate*"

    The image of them going around putting fedoras, bowlers and fezzes on random people is a lot nicer, though.
    posted by zarq at 12:18 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    I sent this note to a friend earlier today. Maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

    I've been thinking quite a bit about this whole Chick-Fil-A (CFA) thing, and I think I may have a better way. I wanted to communicate this way so you wouldn't feel publicly put on the spot. Tomorrow is that "kiss in" protest at CFA. I think confrontational tactics like that are going to just shut people down. They'll be offended, they'll retrench even more. What would gay MLK do? I think he would work to win them over with kindness and get the public on his side. Go to the site below and find your local CFA, then click on the "Visit Us Online". The one in my neighborhood has family night every Tuesday from 5 - 8pm. All of the LGBT community, those who care about them, and everyone interested in fairness should INUNDATE their local CFA. Not to protest, not to confront, not to kiss, not to ridicule, but to reach out and educate the ignorant by showing themselves as people. Families are encouraged to come to CFA, have dinner, hang out, socialize, and take part in the activities. LGBT folks came from families, and even have families of their own right? Why shouldn't you enjoy family night too? LGBT folks sure as hell didn't grow on trees or spring fully formed out of the ground. Show them that you are just like anyone else, give them the respect you deserve from them, don't even bring up LGBT rights. They will come to you, and when they do, let them begin the conversation. Maybe it would be a good idea to start of by pointing out that your personal business is your personal business. Then slowly educate them, show them you just want to be treated as equals, equals who just happened to have been made the way you are by God. Like EVERYONE was. Humanize yourself. Let them see that you have no interest in molesting their children or recruiting anyone into the LGBT lifestyle. Most of all, be respectful, calm, rational, and matter of fact. Look what aggressive confrontation has done to make the situation better in Israel/Palestine. Nothing. You know better than I do that it won't be easy or quick, but you have to get the people on your side, and it's done one mind at a time. The leaders will follow or they will have no one to lead. Please let me know what you think, and feel free to share this.
    posted by Daddy-O at 12:34 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Over the years, rabbis did forbid lesbian sex but there's no clear basis for it in the Torah.

    There's also nothing about lesbianism in the Christian Bible. There's a pretty vague reference somewhere in the epistles about 'change the natural use into that which is against nature' which a lot of contemporary people will tell you is about lesbianism but for a good 1500 years or so it was understood to refer to heterosexual anal sex, so it's obviously murky.
    posted by shakespeherian at 12:44 PM on August 3, 2012


    Of course there isn't. Patriarchs love lesbians! Why would they make up rules to forbid hot, hot lesbian sex after all a penis in the butt is gross and disgusting but a luscious lady licking another luscious lady's labia is lovely!
    posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 1:08 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    "I've been thinking quite a bit about this whole Chick-Fil-A (CFA) thing, and I think I may have a better way. I wanted to communicate this way so you wouldn't feel publicly put on the spot. Tomorrow is that "appreciation day" protest at CFA. I think confrontational tactics like that are going to just shut people down. They'll be offended, they'll retrench even more. [...] All of the Christian community, those who care about them, and everyone interested in fairness should INUNDATE their local CFA. Not to protest, not to confront, not to wear crosses, not to ridicule, but to reach out and educate the ignorant by showing themselves as people. Families are encouraged to come to CFA, have dinner, hang out, socialize, and take part in the activities. Christian folks came from families, and even have families of their own right? Why shouldn't you enjoy family night too? Christian folks sure as hell didn't grow on trees or spring fully formed out of the ground. Show them that you are just like anyone else, give them the respect you deserve from them, don't even bring up religious rights. They will come to you, and when they do, let them begin the conversation. Maybe it would be a good idea to start of by pointing out that your personal business is your personal business. Then slowly educate them, show them you just want to be treated as equals, equals who just happened to have been made the way you are by the uncaring secular universe. Like EVERYONE was. Humanize yourself. Let them see that you have no interest in molesting their children or recruiting anyone into the Christian lifestyle."

    Or, in other words: one of these days it might be like this for you and yours, and then you might understand why nobody wants "suggestions" about "a better way" which assume that the people who hate them are basically correct, and therefore shouldn't be inconvenienced by "confrontational" things like gay people acting like equals in public.

    The act of "aggressive confrontation" in question here is kissing. Not public sex, not standing on the tables screaming, not waving signs, not anything to do with "Israel/Palestine" (huh?), and not any other act which isn't done by straight people in fast-food restaurants every day of the week. Just kissing. The idea that that isn't "respectful, calm, rational, and matter of fact" assumes that gayness itself isn't respectful, calm, rational, or matter of fact... and if that's how you feel, then too bad for you.

    Also, nobody needs to "let them see that you have no interest in molesting their children" except child molesters, the vast majority of whom are straight. Just FYI.
    posted by vorfeed at 1:09 PM on August 3, 2012 [9 favorites]


    There are only two injunctions against men "laying with" other men in the Torah, not four. Both are in Leviticus.

    Hrm. Apparently there's about four more in the New Testament. (Mostly Paul.)

    But the best bit is in Leviticus. 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.' God hates tops. Or pegging. It's unclear.
    posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:12 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I think confrontational tactics like that are going to just shut people down. They'll be offended, they'll retrench even more. What would gay MLK do? I think he would work to win them over with kindness and get the public on his side.

    On the one hand, if you can find a way to talk with your friend so you can both hear each other, great.

    On the other hand, black people sitting at segregated lunch counters, refusing to move from the front of the bus, and trying to go to school where they were not wanted was incredibly confrontational. To us, in this day, it doesn't seem like it, but many people then thought it was so confrontational that the National Guard was required to keep black kids trying to go to school safe, and black and white people working to register black voters were killed for their efforts.

    MLK was non-violent, not non-confrontational.
    posted by rtha at 1:22 PM on August 3, 2012 [12 favorites]


    If you read Leviticus literally, God abhors cuddling.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:26 PM on August 3, 2012


    The Chick Fil A Chargrilled Chicken sandwich is clearly in violation of Leviticus. It contains bacon, which is unclean.
    posted by cell divide at 1:34 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Which leads me to believe that an effective protest would be to try to get Chick Fil A to remove bacon from their menu, because prohibitions against bacon have about the same biblical weight as prohibitions against laying with men.
    posted by cell divide at 1:35 PM on August 3, 2012


    The Chick Fil A Chargrilled Chicken sandwich is clearly in violation of Leviticus. It contains bacon, which is unclean.

    Plus it's meat and cheese. It's like they don't even keep kosher!
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:36 PM on August 3, 2012


    They're redefining the traditional biblical definition of dinner!
    posted by TwoWordReview at 1:38 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    because prohibitions against bacon have about the same biblical weight as prohibitions against laying with men.

    More, actually-- in Acts, God goes out of his way to tell people to stop referring to people as 'unclean' and that the petty old tribal customs laid out in Leviticus which differentiate the Jews from the Gentiles are no longer relevant. But he never actually says it's okay to eat pigs.
    posted by shakespeherian at 1:39 PM on August 3, 2012


    Look, I understand that Jews may (or may not) see those Old Testament rules as binding, but I am really tired of the misunderstanding that people have about the OT rules of what is and what is not kosher. Jesus declared all foods clean in the NT...much of the ceremonial law He fulfilled according to Christianity-and the dietary laws were for Jews and Jews only. (For that matter so is circumcision but I will stop now before I get into the biblical-ness of cat declawing).

    In other words you are free to argue your points but most biblically literate Christians would see that particular analogy as an incorrect argument.

    (Of course if you are debating an Orthodox Jew rock on.)
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 1:40 PM on August 3, 2012


    > Jesus declared all foods clean in the N

    Nah, they were allowed under extreme hardship. There's no evidence that Jesus abridged previous scripture.

    Besides, you're sidestepping the point: why are you fundies selectively enforcing OT rules?
    posted by Burhanistan at 1:42 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    No no no, you have to be careful to remember to interpret the scripture in the appropriate cultural context, but it's also divinely inspired, and please refer to these learned biblical scholars, and we are but human, blah, blah, blah, and that's why it pretty much just says what affirms our beliefs and the parts that don't or seem to contravene them are just difficult to interpret and ought to be prayerfully considered in your next quiet time, thanks for asking and how's your walk?
    posted by gilrain at 1:43 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    St. Alia, I think that's kind of the point - that the injunction against homosexuality was one of those ceremonial laws that Jesus declared extraneous. The scripture in one of the Pauline letters which mentions homosexuality is more so frowning on gay sex during a church service (i.e., it's not so much "homosexuality is icky", but more "guys, church is for praying in, not for orgies").
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:43 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    IT's not selective, and this is not the forum to lay out the whole entire argument.

    If you personally are interested I can see if I can find a link to something and memail it to you but I don't think the mods want to go there here.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 1:44 PM on August 3, 2012


    Jesus declared all foods clean in the NT...much of the ceremonial law He fulfilled according to Christianity-and the dietary laws were for Jews and Jews only. (For that matter so is circumcision but I will stop now before I get into the biblical-ness of cat declawing).

    Well, yeah, the issue is that many many many many prominent conservative Christians point to that passage of Leviticus with no clear argument (or indeed any argument) for why it isn't one of the laws that Jesus told his followers they didn't have to abide by anymore, which makes their reasoning seem a whole lot like "gays are icky."
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:44 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    ChurchHatesTucker: " Hrm. Apparently there's about four more in the New Testament. (Mostly Paul.)

    But the best bit is in Leviticus. 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.' God hates tops. Or pegging. It's unclear.
    "

    So the New Testament doesn't have a problem with lesbians either? Interesting.

    Jews and Christians also view the concept of sin very differently. Jews believe that a sin is an act, not a state of being -- and that we are directly responsible for our actions. There's no concept of original sin in Judaism. We're born innocent, not as sinners.

    From a "practical" point of view, this means there is no prohibition against being a gay man, or being attracted to other gay men in Judaism. It's the actual, physical act of intercourse between men that is prohibited in the Torah.

    I'm an outside observer to Christianity, but it's my sense that there are a few large and quite outspoken Christian sects that demonize gay people just for being gay. It's not just the act of having sex that makes one unable to inherit the Christian kingdom of heaven. It's that person's state of being. Which makes it doubly weird and kind of unfathomable to me when Christians announce that being gay is a choice, not biological.

    Secret Life of Gravy: "Of course there isn't. Patriarchs love lesbians! Why would they make up rules to forbid hot, hot lesbian sex after all a penis in the butt is gross and disgusting but a luscious lady licking another luscious lady's labia is lovely!"

    Luscious labia for everyone! :)

    Jokes aside, the reason apparently given by the rabbis was that lesbian sex wasn't considered true intercourse. Whatever that meant. No penile penetration?
    posted by zarq at 1:46 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I get frustrated by that too, St Alia, but only by the specific OT examples used. There's plenty of stuff in the NT that Christians also choose to ignore. Have you been covering your head in church, lately?
    posted by gilrain at 1:47 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Guys here is the straight dope:

    God gives Peter a vision in Acts 10 when there's a Gentile coming to visit him and Peter is all like 'NOOOOOOOO Gentiles are creepy and bad, they don't follow the Law of Moses!' and then he has a vision where there's a big sheet of exotic animals and in the vision God tells Peter to eat these things and they aren't kosher and Peter refuses because he's a good boy who follows Leviticus and God (in the vision) says 'Don't call anything unclean that which I have made clean' and THEN Peter wakes up and welcomes the Gentile (Cornelius) into his house and EXPLAINS this vision to him, concluding (verse 28 here, verbatim KJV): 'Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean,' which pretty clearly indicates in scripture that it isn't about food, but about people.
    posted by shakespeherian at 1:48 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Gilrain, me and my Eastern Orthodox son had that very discussion last night....heh.

    I do have longish hair, if that helps. ;-)
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 1:50 PM on August 3, 2012


    St. Alia of the Bunnies: "dietary laws were for Jews and Jews only. ("

    Worth noting that Jews have always said that our laws, traditions and rituals only apply to us. All of them. Not just the dietary ones. From our perspective, you've coopted our beliefs, extensively mistranslated and misinterpreted them, and selectively chosen which rules do and do not apply to you.

    On the other hand, each Jewish sect also selectively chooses which rules do and do not apply to us. ;)
    posted by zarq at 1:50 PM on August 3, 2012 [8 favorites]


    From our perspective, you've coopted our beliefs, extensively mistranslated and misinterpreted them, and selectively chosen which rules do and do not apply to you.

    Christianity is the theological version of the English language.
    posted by shakespeherian at 1:52 PM on August 3, 2012 [5 favorites]


    ericb: "*Hate*"

    The image of them going around putting fedoras, bowlers and fezzes on random people is a lot nicer, though.


    Somebody better get Bubbles back in touch with Kima – this is really a new low for him.
    posted by furiousthought at 1:52 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Now I'm convinced that Chick-Fil-A put that swine on that sandwich as a red herring.
    posted by Burhanistan at 1:52 PM on August 3, 2012


    Shakespeherean, this is actually the passage I had in mind:

    Mark 7:14-23 (NIV)

    4 Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. 15 Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.” [16]

    17 After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. 18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

    20 He went on: “What comes out of a person is what defiles them. 21 For it is from within, out of a person’s heart, that evil thoughts come—sexual immorality, theft, murder, 22 adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23 All these evils come from inside and defile a person.”

    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 1:53 PM on August 3, 2012


    Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them?

    Jesus worked blue.
    posted by shakespeherian at 1:56 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    shakespeherian: " Christianity is the theological version of the English language."

    It's an apt analogy! :)
    posted by zarq at 1:58 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    > In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

    This is a leap of logic, you know, and can be interpreted much more narrowly that his followers were quibbling about their food when they were in real danger. Jesus didn't eat no swine.
    posted by Burhanistan at 1:58 PM on August 3, 2012


    I've hit my favorite limit for the day, so could someone please favorite Daddy O's post for me.

    I'll pay you like...tuesday and shit.
    posted by Senor Cardgage at 2:08 PM on August 3, 2012


    (i.e., it's not so much "homosexuality is icky", but more "guys, church is for praying in, not for orgies")

    And rumors of cannibalism are uncategorically denied...

    15 Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.” [16]

    Heh, heh.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 2:08 PM on August 3, 2012


    I don't like being bullied down to what food I can or can't eat if I want to be a "real" LGBT ally.

    I don't like having my rights taken away. That's probably a worse form of bullying than anything you've experienced, at least related to eating junk food.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:21 PM on August 3, 2012 [12 favorites]


    A chicken, bacon and herring sandwich sounds...unappetizing. I could be wrong, though.
    posted by rtha at 2:25 PM on August 3, 2012


    IT's not selective, and this is not the forum to lay out the whole entire argument.

    Oh, please don't even think about doing that. Keeping track of the excluded middles, begging of questions, and circular reasoning is exhausting.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 2:28 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I don't like having my rights taken away. That's probably a worse form of bullying than anything you've experienced, at least related to eating junk food.

    I don't like having my rights taken away either, but somehow I manage to avoid shouting at people when they support people who do it. Most notably, see: First, Second, Sixth, Eighth, Tenth, and Fourteenth amendments. Which is a lot more rights being taken away than by someone simply purchasing a chicken sandwich from a company with an anti-gay CEO.
    posted by corb at 2:29 PM on August 3, 2012


    As has been explained quite a few times in this thread, the issue isn't that Dan Cathy 'said' he is opposed to gay marriage. The issue is that the company donates a shitton of money to lobbying organizations which area attempting to have rights for gays and lesbians restricted.
    posted by shakespeherian at 2:34 PM on August 3, 2012 [7 favorites]


    Also, I wasn't aware it was a good thing to take the systematic dismantling of your rights lying down.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:35 PM on August 3, 2012 [5 favorites]


    CNN regarding CFA donations

    From the article:Most WinShape-backed groups, such as Focus on the Family and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, are mostly apolitical and are mainstream within the evangelical world.

    At the same time, the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center has classified some WinShape-backed organizations, such as the Family Research Council, as anti-gay hate groups.

    WinShape spends the vast majority of its money on internal programs like its camps, which cost $5 million to run in 2010, and foster homes, which cost $3.2 million that year.

    By comparison, the organization gave $1,000 to Family Research Council in 2010 and $1,000 to Exodus International, a group that for years promoted so-called conversion therapy for gays, though the group is now reassessing that stance.



    Help me out here, in all seriousness. Is this really about two thousand dollars worth of donations out of a total of millions? Or is there something else I'm missing?
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 2:40 PM on August 3, 2012


    I'm kind of grossed out by the folks here and elsewhere sniveling about "But, but, I want a chicken sandwich!" Maybe they're meaning to be funny, but I think it's just gross that there needs to be any dithering at all. "Give my money to hate-mongers? Fuck that noise!" seems like it should be a no-brainer. (MissySedai)

    I'm not trying to be funny and I don't feel that I've dithered about eating at CFA since all this started. Before Cathy's comments about marriage, I was excited about the prospect of having a CFA in my neighborhood. I've always experienced good service at the restaurant and think their food is good. Because of the clusterfuck that now surrounds the chain, there won't likely be one opened in my neighborhood, which goes a long way to making sure that I won't eat there. In addition, now that I know where CFA is putting their money, I can't be comfortable eating there.

    When I said, "I really want a chicken sandwich", I meant it's a shame that Cathy has to be an a-hole about gay rights and that we're now fighting about a chicken restaurant. Because I actually liked that restaruant and am sad that I won't be able to eat there any longer. Perhaps I should have been clearer in my original comment, but I'm mildly offended that I've "grossed [you] out".

    -----

    ...the usual thing there has to do with whether the property that's being torn down could be proven useful in any other way. Is that the case here, or not? (raysmj)

    I don't think there's anything that needs to be torn down in order to put up the CFA - but a parcel of land has to be split in order for Home Depot to sell an out lot to CFA. Here's the Google Street View of the area in question. The Home Depot parking lot is huge and rarely completely full. The area is sorta growing - there big box stores in the area have been there as long as I've lived in the city (seven years), but they have added a Starbucks, Panera, some vitamin store, an Xport Fitness, and some other shops in the past couple of years.
    posted by youngergirl44 at 2:49 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I'm sorry, but anybody who calls Focus on the Family "apolitical" needs a better dictionary.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:50 PM on August 3, 2012 [22 favorites]


    Help me out here, in all seriousness. Is this really about two thousand dollars worth of donations out of a total of millions? Or is there something else I'm missing?

    I'm not sure why CNN links to a year-old Equality Matters page with data from at-latest 2008-- they could have linked to this one from a month ago which has data from 2010 in which we see that WinShape donated $1,188,380 in just one year to the Marriage & Family Foundation, an organization founded by... Dan Cathy!
    posted by shakespeherian at 2:55 PM on August 3, 2012 [14 favorites]


    I don't like having my rights taken away either, but somehow I manage to avoid shouting at people when they support people who do it. Most notably, see: First, Second, Sixth, Eighth, Tenth, and Fourteenth amendments.

    Again with the free speech canard. What is it about the difference between opinion and action that is so unclear that people think anti-gay actions - like taking away my rights - are just harmless opinions?
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:56 PM on August 3, 2012 [18 favorites]


    Not to mention that "shouting at people when they support people who do this-and-that" is very clearly a First Amendment right. For example: anti-abortion protests. You have a right to express your opinions; others have a right to express theirs.
    posted by vorfeed at 3:08 PM on August 3, 2012 [7 favorites]


    And if the money donated to anti-gay organizations isn't bad enough, there's already a sexual harrassment lawsuit filed against one franchise that the company has tried sweeping under the rug.

    And then there's another lawsuit concerning a female manager who was fired because her superiors felt women should be stay-at-home moms.

    Funny how the company invests so much money in ensuring people who don't even work at Chik-fil-a adhere to its moral code, and don't do the same for their own employees.
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:24 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Is that picture from WBC real? Even if the sign is fake, Shirley Phelps is on the record backing CFA. Obviously it isn't surprising but this is kind of what I'm getting at. WBC is pretty much universally hated. It's maybe the only thing that anyone can agree on anymore. But right now, the CFA supporters are aligning themselves with the most hated organization in America. Where's the cognitive dissonance?
    posted by triggerfinger at 3:26 PM on August 3, 2012


    Sorry, this is the comment and picture I'm referring to.
    posted by triggerfinger at 3:27 PM on August 3, 2012


    I don't like having my rights taken away either, but somehow I manage to avoid shouting at people when they support people who do it. Most notably, see: First, Second, Sixth, Eighth, Tenth, and Fourteenth amendments.

    The vast majority of gay people manage not to shout at people who are taking away their rights. I don't see why you think this is some sort of unique emotional continence, especially considering that your definition of your rights being taken away is probably pretty laughable. I mean really--who is taking away your first amendment rights? I'd love to know.
    posted by the young rope-rider at 3:29 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Help me out here, in all seriousness. Is this really about two thousand dollars worth of donations out of a total of millions?

    One million between 2003 and 2008. Then two million in 2009.

    Then two million in 2010.

    No figures for 2011 yet but I don't think it's crazy to say they'll probably look similar.

    Or is there something else I'm missing?


    Yes. Yes, there is.
    posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 3:34 PM on August 3, 2012 [12 favorites]


    What I'm getting from the OT/NT analysis is that somehow Jesus has the ability to stretch the five second rule to like forever, so everything is clean now.
    posted by benito.strauss at 3:42 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Perhaps I should have been clearer in my original comment, but I'm mildly offended that I've "grossed [you] out".

    You can be offended if you like. And I don't mean that to be snarky, but I'm not going to apologize, either.

    I stand by what I said. I think the very idea that it's difficult to choose between civil rights and a fast food sandwich is pretty gross. "But it's so delicious!" just doesn't do it for me.

    I haven't touched CFA since I found out that they give money to hate groups - more than 15 years ago - and I've never suffered a pang of regret for that. I value my GLBT friends and family too much to even have half of a second thought about where I stand.
    posted by MissySedai at 3:48 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    I'm sorry, but anybody who calls Focus on the Family "apolitical" needs a better dictionary.

    I'm utterly perplexed at how any observer could write that sentence with a straight face. Focus on the Family are, and have for decades been, fundamentally a political organization with explicit political goals. An incredibly effective one, at that.

    I mean, that's not all they are. They're also really interested in promoting child abuse and generally shitty family dynamics and sexual guilt and so on, but c'mon.
    posted by brennen at 3:49 PM on August 3, 2012 [11 favorites]


    What I'm getting from the OT/NT analysis is that somehow Jesus has the ability to stretch the five second rule to like forever, so everything is clean now.

    Still no confirmation on his ability to microwave a burrito so hot that even he can't eat it, though.
    posted by Burhanistan at 3:51 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    There's more to life than eating quickly.

    Boy, isn't that the truth. I want to eat at a restaurant that uses this as their slogan.
    posted by davejay at 4:07 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Here are lists of anti-gay donations made by Chick-Fil-A's charitable organization, Winshape Foundation: 2010 and 2009 [previously].
    posted by ericb at 4:34 PM on August 3, 2012


    January 29, 2011:
    Nicknamed “Jesus chicken” by jaded secular fans and embraced by Evangelical Christians, Chick-fil-A is among only a handful of large American companies with conservative religion built into its corporate ethos. But recently its ethos has run smack into the gay rights movement. A Pennsylvania outlet’s sponsorship of a February marriage seminar by one of that state’s most outspoken groups against homosexuality lit up gay blogs around the country. Students at some universities have also begun trying to get the chain removed from campuses.

    “If you’re eating Chick-fil-A, you’re eating anti-gay,” one headline read. The issue spread into Christian media circles, too.

    ... With its near-national reach and its transparent conservative Christian underpinnings, Chick-fil-A is a trailblazer of sorts, said Lake Lambert, the author of “Spirituality, Inc.” and dean of the college of liberal arts at Mercer University, where he teaches Christianity.

    “They’re going in a direction we haven’t seen in faith-based businesses before, and that is to a much broader marketing of themselves and their products,” he said. “This is possibly the next phase of evangelical Christianity’s muscle flexing.”

    The company’s Christian culture and its strict hiring practices, which require potential operators to discuss their marital status and civic and church involvement, have attracted controversy before, including a 2002 lawsuit brought by a Muslim restaurant owner in Houston who said he was fired because he did not pray to Jesus with other employees at a training session. The suit was settled.

    The sandwiches that will feed people who attend a February seminar, called “The Art of Marriage: Getting to the Heart of God’s Design,” in Harrisburg, Pa., are but a tiny donation.

    Over the years, the company’s operators, its WinShape Foundation and the Cathy family have given millions of dollars to a variety of causes and programs, including scholarships that require a pledge to follow Christian values, a string of Christian-based foster homes and groups working to defeat same-sex marriage initiatives.
    posted by ericb at 4:38 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Actually the primary New Testament passage Christians look to regarding the question of keeping kosher, circumcision, eating shellfish, mixed cloth clothing, etc. comes later in Acts. In response to Paul's missionary work among gentiles and Peter's vision, the apostles are said to have met to decide what exactly would be required of gentiles who became Christians.

    Acts gives this as the text of the letter outlining their decision:

    "The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the believers of Gentile origin in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that certain persons who have gone out from us, though with no instructions from us, have said things to disturb you and have unsettled your minds, we have decided unanimously to choose representatives and send them to you, along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, who have risked their lives for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell." (Acts 15:23-29).

    (This also fits with the passage in Mark quoted above where Jesus declares all foods clean but places sexual immorality in a different category along with theft, murder, malice, and greed. Also, Paul discusses the issue of gentiles keeping Jewish law--usually focusing on circumcision--several places in his letters.)

    Whether same-sex marriage really is an example of "fornication" or "sexual immorality" is the place the real debate is happening (and minds sometimes changing) among Christians who think the Bible is authoritative on this matter and whose minds aren't 100% made up one way or the other. Harping about the supposed hypocrisy of eating shellfish is mostly ignored as obvious ignorance from outsiders.
    posted by straight at 4:48 PM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Again with the free speech canard. What is it about the difference between opinion and action that is so unclear that people think anti-gay actions - like taking away my rights - are just harmless opinions?

    What right of yours has Chick-Fil-A specifically taken away? Not, "They donated to someone who donated to someone who sponsored a law." What right have they specifically taken away? They have an opinion - that I happen to disagree with, even - but that isn't "Taking rights away."

    I think that Bank of America is extremely shitty for their actions towards gun manufacturers, as are Paypal and others - actions that are certainly discriminatory, such as Paypal shutting down all donations for an established and well-respected soldier's charity because they were also raffling off a gun. I personally don't bank with Bank of America. But I also don't expect that "anyone who isn't with me is against me." I don't show up to Bank of America locations to scream at passerby. I don't harangue people who have accounts there for failing to support my personal financial choices. I don't leave nasty comments on every website that has a paypal link. I don't tell people that I think they're gross for refusing to participate in my boycotts.

    The vast majority of gay people manage not to shout at people who are taking away their rights. I don't see why you think this is some sort of unique emotional continence,

    I certainly hope this isn't a unique emotional ability, but I do think we should be able to say that it's acting like an asshole when people do shout at people or defriend them for the unforgivable sin of...eating a chicken sandwich.

    It's more-activist-than-thou shit, and it doesn't speak well of anyone.
    posted by corb at 5:00 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I certainly hope this isn't a unique emotional ability, but I do think we should be able to say that it's acting like an asshole when people do shout at people or defriend them for the unforgivable sin of...eating a chicken sandwich.

    oh, no! not... defriending!
    posted by vorfeed at 5:08 PM on August 3, 2012 [6 favorites]


    I certainly hope this isn't a unique emotional ability, but I do think we should be able to say that it's acting like an asshole when people do shout at people or defriend them for the unforgivable sin of...eating a chicken sandwich.

    So you're saying it's bad for people you've alienated to act like they've been alienated?

    What?

    I'm sorry, but eating a sandwich to spite gay people makes you the asshole, not the victim.
    posted by Sys Rq at 5:09 PM on August 3, 2012 [16 favorites]


    St. Alia of the Bunnies: "In other words you are free to argue your points but most biblically literate Christians would see that particular analogy as an incorrect argument."

    I grew up with a lot of highly biblically literate people who strongly disagree.
    posted by mullingitover at 5:25 PM on August 3, 2012


    What right of yours has Chick-Fil-A specifically taken away? Not, "They donated to someone who donated to someone who sponsored a law."

    Your claim that customers get to wipe their hands clean of any moral responsibility because it's a business transaction ignores everything that happens downstream of that purchase.

    At this point, given the coverage this subject has received, if you give Chick-Fil-A money, you know that this money will be used for anti-gay political advocacy and that you are actively, willingly taking part in a collective effort to separate me from my rights.

    This is the difference between opinion and action:

    Opinion: You state public agreement with Cathy's political agenda. This is protected by the First Amendment.

    Action: You are actively, of your volition, going to this business and patronizing it, in order to provide financial support to Cathy, which supports his political agenda. That political agenda includes acting in a coordinated fashion with other like-minded people to pass laws to eliminate my rights (such as the end results of DOMA and Prop 8). Taking away my Constitutional rights is — usually, not always — against my Constitutional rights.

    Some of that advocacy even calls for the death penalty for gays and lesbians (or at least getting its endorsement by American politicians). At this point, you're no longer just buying a chicken sandwich, you're buying into — investing in, really — a larger plan to eliminate gays and lesbians from society.

    That's no longer just about opinion, that's a violent ideal you are choosing to act upon — though actions, not words.

    If you donate money to politicians (directly or indirectly) that gets laws passed to take away my rights, you're a direct cause of acts of discrimination, however small or incidental your purchase.

    They have an opinion - that I happen to disagree with, even - but that isn't "Taking rights away."

    Just as an aside, I wonder how is it that people expressing disagreement with giving money to Chick-Fil-A takes Second Amendment rights away from you? Other than sponsoring violence against gay people, what does Cathy's hate campaign have to do with guns? Your laundry list of Amendments was definitely a new one to me.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:32 PM on August 3, 2012 [15 favorites]


    I certainly hope this isn't a unique emotional ability, but I do think we should be able to say that it's acting like an asshole when people do shout at people or defriend them for the unforgivable sin of...eating a chicken sandwich.

    It is pretty disingenuous to present the message of participating in Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day as 'I would like to eat a chicken sandwich.'
    posted by shakespeherian at 5:43 PM on August 3, 2012 [12 favorites]


    St. Alia of the Bunnies: "In other words you are free to argue your points but most biblically literate Christians would see that particular analogy as an incorrect argument."

    I grew up with a lot of highly biblically literate people who strongly disagree.


    I know of the existence of Seventh Day Adventists, which is why I said MOST and not ALL.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:48 PM on August 3, 2012




    What right of yours has Chick-Fil-A specifically taken away? Not, "They donated to someone who donated to someone who sponsored a law." What right have they specifically taken away? They have an opinion - that I happen to disagree with, even - but that isn't "Taking rights away."

    It's Friday night after work and I'm tired and lack the energy and ambition to find and follow the trail, but I wouldn't be surprised if an hour's worth of research online showed that Chick-fil-a gave money to organizations which were actively campaigning to pass Proposition 8 in California. If that is true, they literally worked to take away the already established right to marry for the gay and lesbian citizens of our most populous state.
    posted by hippybear at 6:17 PM on August 3, 2012 [3 favorites]


    I think that Bank of America is extremely shitty for their actions towards gun manufacturers

    Wow, I can no longer say that I hate everything about BoA.
    posted by winna at 6:24 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Action: You are actively, of your volition, going to this business and patronizing it, in order to provide financial support to Cathy, which supports his political agenda. That political agenda includes acting in a coordinated fashion with other like-minded people to pass laws to eliminate my rights (such as the end results of DOMA and Prop 8). Taking away my Constitutional rights is — usually, not always — against my Constitutional rights.

    Blazecock: I understand what you're saying and I agree it is problematic, but I think the pushback you're getting is that you are not taking into account that there is a third option:

    "Resignation: you do not like the causes that Cathy supports, but you do not want to give up the product in question. You are not DELIBERATELY patronizing Chik-fil-a solely to provide financial support to Cathy - in fact, you oppose Cathy's politics. But there is no other fast food establishment nearby/your kid is whining about it/you are just hungry and you don't have other options, so you go there."

    What I'm getting at is: there is a difference between, "ha HA! I love what Cathy's doing and I'm gonna give him more money so THERE!" and "I wish Cathy wasn't a dickbean, but I gotta eat."

    Neither is an ideal attitude, but there's a DIFFERENCE between those two attitudes. And I think most of the people in here are the latter, and you're accusing them of being the former. The two states require distinctly different action against them, though, so accusing someone of actively supporting Cathy if they're just hungry may not work as well as you may hope.
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:28 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    There are actually locations where Chick-fil-a is the only restaurant within reasonable distance, no other options possible, grocery stores and 7-11s don't exist, and the corner gas station doesn't have a small deli section?

    I disbelieve that exists.
    posted by hippybear at 6:36 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    People were saying the same thing about abortion back in the 80s.

    True, but there are both wealthy and male gay people.


    XQUZYPHYR, may I introduce you to Mr. Thiel.
    posted by MikeKD at 6:42 PM on August 3, 2012


    Politically influential, big-money, corporate, evangel Christianity. Mega-churches and mega-stores.

    Supported faithfully by a lot of the 40+% that consistently vote right, electing creepers who love money and power.

    Welcome to your dystopian future, underclass. Yes, that's you, 99%er.
    posted by five fresh fish at 7:17 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Hippybear, do you understand my larger point that there is a difference between "I'm deliberately eating at Chik-fil-a in order to give Cathy money because i disagree with his politics" and "I don't agree with Cathy's politics and I feel bad that money is going to support them but I am still going to Chik-fil-a because of reasons"?
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:19 PM on August 3, 2012


    [Tanazaki, you need to dial back the glib, inflammatory remarks and generally make a greater effort to appear as though you are not just trolling. ]
    posted by restless_nomad at 7:24 PM on August 3, 2012 [4 favorites]


    No, actually, I don't. The situation you gave as the reason for being the person who gives money to them but who doesn't support their politics (and even anti-supports them, or whatever that word may be) is one which simply doesn't exist. Chick-fil-a is likely never going to be the only food choice within 2-mile radius. In fact, they seem to do with a lot of second-tier fast food chains do, and let other bigger chains do all the research about where is a good place to put a restaurant, and then build next door or across the street. (There was a time when CFA was only found in shopping malls, but we seem to be long beyond those days.)

    People who are doing as you suggest, it seems to me, are simply being lazy. Either lazy with their dollars (not caring about where the money they give such a company may end up), or lazy with their time (because hey, CFA is on this block, and other choices, well, they're actually 2 or 3 or 5 blocks away!).

    Either way, the end result is the same -- they simply don't actually care.

    Now, I can forgive people for not caring. There are a lot of things I just don't care about, and my actions, I'm sure, reflect that lack of caring.

    But claiming to care, and then having your actions speak otherwise because you can't be bothered? Well, the proof of the pudding, etc.
    posted by hippybear at 7:46 PM on August 3, 2012 [10 favorites]


    "In fact, they seem to do WHAT a lot of second-tier"...
    posted by hippybear at 7:47 PM on August 3, 2012


    But there is no other fast food establishment nearby/your kid is whining about it/you are just hungry and you don't have other options, so you go there."

    Even if there are no other options and a person is desperately hungry, the money they are spending in that restaurant will still go to organizations that promote hatred and intolerance. So I guess the question becomes where one draws the line between principle and convenience.

    As a parent, I actually think it's responsible and appropriate to tell your kid, "I won't go to that restaurant anymore, and here's why." My kids are too young to understand the details, but if I told them, "The man who owns that restaurant is not a nice person, and Daddy doesn't want to give him our money anymore," I bet they'd understand it.

    Kids learn from their parents' example. Teaching them that one's principles should take precedence over convenience when possible is a good lesson, I think.
    posted by zarq at 8:25 PM on August 3, 2012 [20 favorites]


    As a parent, I actually think it's responsible and appropriate to tell your kid, "I won't go to that restaurant anymore, and here's why." My kids are too young to understand the details, but if I told them, "The man who owns that restaurant is not a nice person, and Daddy doesn't want to give him our money anymore," I bet they'd understand it.

    Little kids understand more than we give them credit for.

    Elder Monster was 5 when we stopped going to CFA (and we only ever went occasionally as it was, because it's pretty spendy). When he asked why, I told him "The people who own the company don't think people like Uncle Kenn should be treated like everyone else, and that's wrong."

    Pretty sure that conversations like that are why he didn't fret about coming out bi when he was 15.
    posted by MissySedai at 8:31 PM on August 3, 2012 [10 favorites]


    So, way down here in the thread, and no one has pointed out that all these people who are showing there support for Chick-fil-a sure are eating a bunch of coq?
    posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 8:58 PM on August 3, 2012


    I mentioned it last night after seeing Jon Stewart make exactly the same point on his television show.
    posted by hippybear at 9:01 PM on August 3, 2012


    Sorry missed that one, but you have to admit it is much funnier in french, non?
    posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 9:04 PM on August 3, 2012


    I hear it's funniest of all in Québécois.
    posted by hippybear at 9:10 PM on August 3, 2012 [2 favorites]


    My family didn't buy grapes for pretty much my entire childhood. Because Cesar Chavez.

    Right now, we're in hard place, boycott-wise: out favorite local coffee place is being bought by a multinational that makes a rat poison that gets into the food chain and kills a lot of raptors. The same multinational makes drugs that treats opiate addicts used to treat opiate addicts. What to do? At the moment, dither.
    posted by rtha at 9:10 PM on August 3, 2012


    Uvas no! was a way of life for me too. I went and bought some practically the day I heard that the UFW had dropped the boycott, as my small token of appreciation to the growers for finally working things out. Couldn't bring myself to buy Chilean grapes much, either. I did now and then, but always felt like a scab.

    Luckily, I am merely continuing my 49-year-long Chick-Fil-A boycott without skipping a beat. Never had one, never will.

    Also, are these assholes whining about their first amendment rights largely the same bunch of clowns that were burning Dixie Chicks albums a few scant years ago, and yelling "Shut up and sing?" How do they live with themselves?
    posted by Devils Rancher at 9:49 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    The situation you gave as the reason for being the person who gives money to them but who doesn't support their politics (and even anti-supports them, or whatever that word may be) is one which simply doesn't exist. Chick-fil-a is likely never going to be the only food choice within 2-mile radius.

    Okay, if including that as a possibility is going to make you nitpick it to death, then just take it out and pretend I didn't say it, and used another more plausible-to-you example for why someone could still go to chik-fil-a despite disagreeing with Cathy's politics.

    Because there are people who hate Cathy's politics but like the chicken too much, and will still go to Chik-fil-a for that reason, and no matter how hard you stomp your little feeties you are going to be WRONG about the fact that they INTENTIONALLY are going to ACTIVELY commit hate acts against gay people.

    And if you tell them that, they're not going t listen to you, but if you say something like "Dude, the Southern Chicken sandwich at McDonald's tastes a lot like that and isn't run by a bigot," then maybe they WILL.
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:27 PM on August 3, 2012


    Because there are people who hate Cathy's politics but like the chicken too much

    [sad face]

    This is why we can't have nice things. People can't be arsed even a teeny little bit to inconvenience themselves. The chicken is too good to give up.
    posted by five fresh fish at 10:53 PM on August 3, 2012 [5 favorites]


    This is why we can't have nice things. People can't be arsed even a teeny little bit to inconvenience themselves. The chicken is too good to give up.

    And the people you're trying to convince think you're a big meanie if you say that and stop listening to you and you still have a sad face.

    But wait, if you tell them "try the KFC whatever, it's just like it and plus you're also not supporting chik-fil-a," then YAY they're listening to you and they join your side! And now you can have a happy face!

    .....Is this really a hard concept to grasp?
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:57 PM on August 3, 2012 [1 favorite]


    corb: ... I don't like being bullied down to what food I can or can't eat ...

    Just imagine how pissed off you would be if someone was bullying you about who you could marry.

    I'm asking you to seriously take a minute and imagine it. I don't know what group you're in that might be a target for discrimination, but you should be able to find one. (I have to imagine 70 years ago and 2000 miles away to find one. I'm lucky.) For discussion's sake, let's imagine you're Irish and your husband is Italian. There are folks going around saying that people from opposite sides of the English Channel shouldn't be allowed to marry. Ray Croc, the head of McDonald's, comes out and says that he's you shouldn't be allowed to marry, and he's giving money to groups that are working to make your marriage illegal.

    The next week millions of people head to McDonald's, happily proclaiming that your marriage should be eliminated.
    posted by benito.strauss at 11:53 PM on August 3, 2012 [10 favorites]


    I'm sorry, but eating a sandwich to spite gay people makes you the asshole, not the victim.

    Eating a sandwich just to spite gay people does make you the asshole. But as EmpressCallipygos mentions above, there are an awful lot of people that would just like to have some reasonably healthy, tasty fast food with a nice environment for the kids. And to assume that all of those people hate gay people is just absolutely wrong.

    For example: I'm not really affected by this, because there aren't any CFAs around me, but if I was driving through somewhere that had one, I might eat it, because it's cheap, tasty, and healthy-ish. Does that mean that all of my donations to the Human Rights Campaign, or my man-hours spent working to end DADT are wiped out, and now suddenly I'm a bigot? No. It means I like chicken, and I am tired of the boycotts-of-the-moment, particularly around what a CEO thinks or does.

    I'm asking you to seriously take a minute and imagine it. I don't know what group you're in that might be a target for discrimination, but you should be able to find one.

    I assure you, I don't have to look hard to find a reason why I might be a target of discrimination. But at the same time, I just don't believe in pressuring people to join my boycott, or in berating employees for working at an establishment that supports it.

    Again. There are a lot of boycotts people could be participating in, but aren't. For example, how many of you have drunk a Coca-Cola product in the last month?
    A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Florida accuses the Coca-Cola Company, its Colombian subsidiary and business affiliates of using paramilitary death squads to murder, torture, kidnap and threaten union leaders at the multinational soft drink manufacturer’s Colombian bottling plants
    Does that mean you all support killing union leaders? Or does it mean that you want a tasty drink, and are exhausted by the sheer amount of people who support something you don't believe in?
    posted by corb at 1:57 AM on August 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


    For example: I'm not really affected by this, because there aren't any CFAs around me, but if I was driving through somewhere that had one, I might eat it, because it's cheap, tasty, and healthy-ish. Does that mean that all of my donations to the Human Rights Campaign, or my man-hours spent working to end DADT are wiped out, and now suddenly I'm a bigot? No. It means I like chicken, and I am tired of the boycotts-of-the-moment, particularly around what a CEO thinks or does.

    But it's not just the CEO. Actual money is being funnelled from that corporation into anti-gay activism. So, when you eat there, part of the money you're spending is actively going to make life worse for gay people.

    You can like this or not like this. That's up to you. But it's simple fact. If you eat at Chick-Fil-A, some of the money you spend is being used to hurt people. There's no food that could ever be tasty enough to get me to participate in that deal, if I had any alternative whatsoever. I'd eat there before starving, but that's about the only thing that could get me to shop there ever again.

    Your priorities may be different.... maybe a tasty sandwich is more important to you than what the money you spend is subsequently used for. But don't act all offended when people point out that some of the money you spend there is used to spread hate.
    posted by Malor at 2:19 AM on August 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


    Your priorities may be different.... maybe a tasty sandwich is more important to you than what the money you spend is subsequently used for. But don't act all offended when people point out that some of the money you spend there is used to spread hate.

    The same could be said about everyone's taxes and the Iraq War, I note, but I don't see a ton of tax resisters.
    posted by corb at 2:44 AM on August 4, 2012


    "I think confrontational tactics like that are going to just shut people down. They'll be offended, they'll retrench even more. What would gay MLK do? I think he would work to win them over with kindness and get the public on his side."

    From A letter from a Birmingham Jail, where MLK says exactly what he would do.

    "You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

    ...

    I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
    " -MLK

    Please be sure to read the entire letter, its not so long.
    posted by Blasdelb at 2:57 AM on August 4, 2012 [18 favorites]


    The same could be said about everyone's taxes and the Iraq War, I note, but I don't see a ton of tax resisters.

    Except that people are compelled to pay tax by law, while the patrons of CFA are there by choice. Not the greatest analogy.
    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:02 AM on August 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


    This is why we can't have nice things. People can't be arsed even a teeny little bit to inconvenience themselves. The chicken is too good to give up.

    I wonder how many of the folks posting on the Internet against Chick-Fil-A are doing so on hip iProducts?
    posted by Tanizaki at 5:33 AM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    But as EmpressCallipygos mentions above, there are an awful lot of people that would just like to have some reasonably healthy, tasty fast food with a nice environment for the kids. And to assume that all of those people hate gay people is just absolutely wrong.

    Has anyone said this? This is a weird privilege thing where the OMG MOST IMPORTANT THING that we have to focus on is whether or not random people we're not talking about might accidentally get thought of as bigots. One single incident of rudeness launches a campaign of a million paragraphs about the mean people potentially oppressing you with their mean words that they never said to you ever! OH NO!

    If you don't want to accidentally be thought of as a bigot, avoid this restaurant. Or just don't tell anyone you're eating there. In other words, don't flaunt it. I'm sure you'll be absolutely fine.
    posted by the young rope-rider at 5:40 AM on August 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Except that people are compelled to pay tax by law, while the patrons of CFA are there by choice. Not the greatest analogy.

    It is a great analogy for the historically literate. If you are not so inclined, Blasdelb gave you a marvelous example by citing "Letter from a Birmingham Jail". There is a reason it is not called "Letter from a Birmingham Resort and Day Spa".

    For a more directly analogous example, Henry David Thoreau was jailed because he refused to pay taxes in protest of the US-Mexican War. You can read the story in "Civil Disobedience", and take particular note of his exchange with Ralph Waldo Emerson.
    posted by Tanizaki at 5:42 AM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    > But as EmpressCallipygos mentions above, there are an awful lot of people that would just like to have some reasonably healthy, tasty fast food with a nice environment for the kids. And to assume that all of those people hate gay people is just absolutely wrong.

    Has anyone said this? This is a weird privilege thing where the OMG MOST IMPORTANT THING that we have to focus on is whether or not random people we're not talking about might accidentally get thought of as bigots.


    Yeah, Blazecock Pileon said it upthread.

    That's the whole REASON I said what I said.
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:05 AM on August 4, 2012


    Everyone picks "what hill they want to die on." Some people on both sides feel ultra strong on the particular matter. Most people are in the middle and are going to do what they feel like at the time. And then some people are pragmatic and do what they feel like will have real results and don't worry about doing something for the symbolic action.


    Even if Chick-fil-a went out of business, and even if every other single fast food restaurant actually gave money to the cause of gay marriage, to those who feel strongly on the issue, not one dime of the money will change their minds. That is to say, in my mind at least (and I understand here this makes me an outlier) whether or not gay marriage is legal is not even what is important. To those who simply want it legal, it wouldn't matter, but to those who want every other single person to agree with them on the topic? Money doesn't work that way.

    And if every restaurant in town followed CFA's lead, and gave to Focus on the Family or whatever, would that simple act change a single mind on the other side? Nope.

    So I guess I am wondering if Chick-fil-a is worth all this brouhaha. For either side.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 6:38 AM on August 4, 2012


    five fresh fish: This is why we can't have nice things. People can't be arsed even a teeny little bit to inconvenience themselves. The chicken is too good to give up.

    EmpressCallipygos: And the people you're trying to convince think you're a big meanie if you say that and stop listening to you and you still have a sad face.

    Right, and that's exactly the point where I realize they don't care.

    Case in point: back in 1991 when the whole Cracker Barrel thing was in the news, I had started my coming out process about a year earlier. Neither me nor my sister were living with my parents any longer, but we were all still living in the same city. We were all at my parents house one Saturday, and my parents announced that we were all going out to dinner... at Cracker Barrel.

    I explained to them exactly why I really didn't want to eat at Cracker Barrel, and asked them please not to eat there anymore and could we all go to a different restaurant instead?

    Their response, all three of them, was "well, we really like their food and think it's a cool atmosphere to eat in, and so we're going."

    And they all went, and I didn't go.

    And it was at exactly that moment that I realized they didn't care.

    And to this day, they still don't. My sister disinvited me from her first wedding because she was afraid my partner and I were going to make out in the church pews during the ceremony and cause a big scene. Her subsequent weddings, she's kindly sent invitations addressed only to me, never both of us, and never with a +1 invitation. My parents have never invited both of us back to their home for Thanksgiving or Christmas, only me. The cumulative knowledge I have about my family is that they don't care about me or my relationship of (now) nearly 20 years or whether I feel like I think they think I'm a real person. They have their worldview, and who I am and the life I live simply doesn't fit into their grand scheme of things.

    See, the thing is, I don't give a rat's ass about whether Random Joe Schmo who walks into a restaurant with clearly-stated anti-gay policies might be anti-gay. Most of the world is anti-gay, and it's something I've grown used to. It sucks, but frankly my approach is to just assume anyone I don't know is anti-gay until they have the chance to prove otherwise.

    What I care about is when people who have had things explained to them in a calm and rational manner by someone close to them still make the choice to demonstrate that they simply don't care. At that point, I can see the cards on the table, and I know exactly what the score is.

    If that makes me a big meanie, so be it. At least it is a clear sign of exactly where I stand in someone's life, how important my sense of well-being is as opposed to their sense of material comfort and gastronomic satisfaction. I'd rather be a meanie who has a clear vision of the truth than remain silent, be perceived as a non-meanie, and have people who claim to love me actually hating me in secret.
    posted by hippybear at 6:51 AM on August 4, 2012 [42 favorites]


    So I guess I am wondering if Chick-fil-a is worth all this brouhaha. For either side.

    Of course it isn't. It was a publicity stunt, and it worked brilliantly. It has everything to do with drumming up free publicity and selling chicken, and nothing to do with Christians or gays, except as pawns.

    That is worth some brouhaha. On both sides. We got played. All of us.
    posted by Sys Rq at 6:55 AM on August 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Yeah, Blazecock Pileon said it upthread.

    I looked, and I don't see where he said "everyone who eats there is a bigot and should be yelled at", and yet that is what is being responded to. Every reasonable point made by pro-boycott people is being lumped into the most extreme interpretation and behavior that can be found, and that extremity is being argued against with voluble passion like anyone is defending it.

    Here is what this thread sounds like to me: Enough of this talk about gay rights! Won't someone think of the people eating chicken who might or might not be bigots and who probably won't be bothered in any way for doing it?!?!? That is the REAL ISSUE here! How to make those people feel better about themselves for eating a fucking chicken sandwich! They were probably born with a love of chicken!!! THINK OF THEM, WON'T YOU??
    posted by the young rope-rider at 7:04 AM on August 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


    Even if Chick-fil-a went out of business, and even if every other single fast food restaurant actually gave money to the cause of gay marriage, to those who feel strongly on the issue, not one dime of the money will change their minds.

    But the money will change whether people can actually get married, because money buys policy in this great democracy of ours. Sad but true.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:14 AM on August 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Inaction and indifference is killing our society.
    posted by five fresh fish at 8:16 AM on August 4, 2012




    My father grew up with socialist sympathies in New Jersey. We moved out to Southern California and I grew up in Orange County. Back then, both Disneyland and Knotts' Berry Farm had anti-gay policies. Walter Knott, the head of Knott's Berry Farm, had such rotten politics, and actively gave money to such nasty groups that we didn't go there. As a great man (my father) said, "That bastard ain't getting one cent of my money." By the 90's both parks had changed policies, and Disneyland even has "Gay Days" now.

    So, what does this tell us?
    • These things can and do sometimes change.
    • It may take a passing of ownership to the next generation for the change to take place. Dan Cathy might never change his mind, but here's hoping his kids think it's not worth the bother of working to prevent gay people from marrying.
    • Giving up Knott's Berry Farm when Disneyland is just down the road really isn't doing much to brag about.
    • There would be no reason for a corporation to change these policies if it wasn't costing them something, in either money or bad press.
    • Walter Knott helped rescue the boysenberry from disappearing, so there's something good in everybody. Try the jam; it's gender-blindingly deliciously.
    posted by benito.strauss at 8:39 AM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    It seems that the staff of this Chik-Fil-A didn't mind all the man kissing.
    posted by Burhanistan at 9:14 AM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    In the long term 'money talks' and 'boycotts' work:
    Speaking to shareholders on Wednesday, David Friend [CEO] of Carbonite said that the move away from advertising with Limbaugh was the "biggest factor" in the sluggish growth of his company in the second quarter of the financial year. He said that the company had moved to new radio shows, but would not benefit from their ad revenue for some time.

    ... But he stood firm by his choice, saying, "I'm not regretful of the decision, I think things would have been worse had we not done that.". *
    And, sometimes, principles trump profits and are the right thing to follow in a civilized society.
    posted by ericb at 9:26 AM on August 4, 2012 [7 favorites]


    National Same Sex Kiss Day's Albums -- photos and videos.
    posted by ericb at 9:29 AM on August 4, 2012




    Tea Party Report: Chick fil-A vs. the Gays
    posted by homunculus at 10:47 AM on August 4, 2012


    One the one hand, we're told that if we want to change things, we should "vote with our wallets", because changing things through the government is communism.

    On the other hand, if we do try to "vote with our wallets", we're told that we're wrong to care about anything other than whether the product is of good quality or the price is right. If we refuse to give our money to a business for political reasons, and especially if we -- God forbid -- tell other people about that, we're bullies infringing on the job creators' first amendment rights. Or we get told that if we don't also boycott every other company and refuse to pay taxes (no ulterior motive, there), we're hypocrites.

    It's almost like the libertarian-minded are more concerned with condemning anything liberals do or don't do, even if they ostensibly agree with the issue being discussed.
    posted by dirigibleman at 10:54 AM on August 4, 2012 [8 favorites]


    "Being gay isn't a choice, but being a bigot certainly is."

    -- L.Z. Granderson
    posted by ericb at 11:06 AM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Chick-Fil-A Supporters Don't 'Maim and Rape' Like Liberals

    It's not a left vs. right distinction. It's change things vs. preserve the status quo. You don't have to push as hard to keep things the same. When right-wing folk want to change things they can be pretty impolite too.
    posted by benito.strauss at 11:24 AM on August 4, 2012


    One might argue whether ethical consumerism really makes a difference…

    …but it sure as hell can't hurt.

    In the big scheme of things, ie. lacking fame, my means of expeessing my voice are two-fold: I influence our government by voting and I influence our capitalist society by voting with my dollars.

    I can't avoid compromise; it is essentially impossible to avoid supporting the expoitation of foreign labour.

    Regardless, my responsibility is to keep trying to make a more-ethical choice each time I act.
    posted by five fresh fish at 12:05 PM on August 4, 2012


    dirigibleman: It's almost like the libertarian-minded are more concerned with condemning anything liberals do or don't do,

    I'm pretty libertarian, and I agree with liberals more often than I do with conservatives, the largest exception being economic policies. (I'm a firm believer, f'r example, that you need to pay for what you use, that governments are not fundamentally different from any other economic actor, and that they cannot freely run deficits over long periods without catastrophic problems. This is not a popular idea among modern liberals, especially progressives. They confuse modern dollars, which are infinite, for wealth, which is not.)

    The Tea Party started out pretty sensible, mostly just pissed about the deficits and the bank bailouts. But it got hijacked by extremely corrupt people, and has gone seriously loonytunes. But there's a core of truth to what they're talking about -- the deficits we're running matter. They matter a lot. And the bank bailouts were a catastrophically bad error - the entire idea of Too Big To Fail is an idea so incredibly bad that, if we don't abandon it, the eventual price tag will be $ALL.

    You just have to find out, with a specific libertarian, if they're thinking about what they're talking about, or if they're just parroting soundbites. Parrots are a waste of time, but in my experience, the genuine thinking libertarians tend to have very high ethical standards. That overall thought pattern closely resembles classic liberalism from the early 20th century, and they certainly did a great deal of good in the world.
    posted by Malor at 12:52 PM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    The Tea Party started out pretty sensible, mostly just pissed about the deficits and the bank bailouts. But it got hijacked by extremely corrupt people, and has gone seriously loonytunes.

    This is what kicked off the Tea Party. It was always loonytunes and fueled by partisan interests.
    posted by krinklyfig at 2:56 PM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    We were wrong

    The fact of the matter is, this was never about freedom of speech.
    This was never about toys.
    This was never about faith.

    posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:18 PM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Excerpt from one of the comments in Blazecock Pileon's link above:

    My heart has been utterly and completely broken this week as I've watched my GLBTQ friends wander around with agony in their eyes. As one who loves Christ and wants to love as he did, I have been sick to my stomach that so many Christians REFUSED to hear the heart-breaking cries of a group who have been tortured and marginalized throughout history. I am grieved that we allowed ourselves to march into battle to preserve our rights-rights that were never in jeopardy in the first place-while completely ignoring the carnage and destruction we left in our wake. God have mercy.
    posted by gaspode at 4:06 PM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    This got deleted from the front page, with a suggestion to post it here:
    Tuesday, August 7, 2012 -National Starbucks Appreciation Day. Starbucks is one of the companies supporting marriage equality.
    - Posted by semmi

    I don't want to hijack semmi's post but I didn't see a comment on this after several hours.
    posted by fireoyster at 4:49 PM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Does Starbucks really need an appreciation day?

    I mean, I support supporting companies which are behind my existence and all... but $7 coffees? And the number of people I already know who visit them religiously is pretty high. Is Starbucks giving money to American Foundation For Equal Rights to help pay Olsen and Boies' staff's salaries or something?

    Anyway, one of the links in that aborted post lists many many companies which support LGBT rights. Support any and all of them with your dollars, not on any specific day but every chance you can. Whether they are giving money to specific causes or not, making informed choices with your consumer spending power can't hurt and will only help to shift the flow of money out of the hands of other companies who aren't outspoken about their support.

    Also, a donation or three to some of the organizations listed above the corporate entities in that link would be a nice idea. And doing that on a specific date probably IS a good idea -- to show that you're paying attention to campaigns such as these, and to encourage similar things in the future.
    posted by hippybear at 5:27 PM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    hippybear: "Does Starbucks really need an appreciation day?

    I mean, I support supporting companies which are behind my existence and all... but $7 coffees? And the number of people I already know who visit them religiously is pretty high. Is Starbucks giving money to American Foundation For Equal Rights to help pay Olsen and Boies' staff's salaries or something?
    "

    I think they do, insofar as it's a response to the bigoted Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day bit. Yep, I go to Starbucks but not on a daily basis and will make sure to do so on the 7th.

    West of the Cascades, the most I've ever spent for a drink at Starbucks was around $6 and that was for the largest size with extra-priced milk and syrups. My normal drink is $3.93, including 9.5% sales tax in the Emerald City.
    posted by fireoyster at 5:42 PM on August 4, 2012


    I thought the Emerald City was Boise. Oh wait, that's just the name of their most prominent gay bar.
    posted by hippybear at 5:51 PM on August 4, 2012


    > My sister disinvited me from her first wedding because she was afraid my partner and I were going to make out in the church pews during the ceremony

    I really hope you crashed the wedding and did just that.
    posted by Panjandrum at 5:52 PM on August 4, 2012


    I really hope you crashed the wedding and did just that.

    Tempting... but flying 700 miles x 2 people simply to piss off a redneck family my sister was marrying into? Yeah... not actually worth it. I've just sort of not talked to my sister much since then.
    posted by hippybear at 5:54 PM on August 4, 2012


    Besides, the asshole was beating her within a short time after the wedding, and they were divorced before too long. It would have been paying witness to (one of the many) bad relationship decisions she's made in her life. I felt bad about not attending for a very short time, until I heard she was divorcing him, and then I felt vindicated in my decision not to overcome her (and his) bigotry and not attend.

    (Yes, my sister's lovelife has been a soap opera. I generally don't pay too close attention, because it's just too depressing. And they say gay marriage is destroying the family. She's on her 4th (or is it 5th?) marriage. I'm sure I played such a HUGE role in each of those.)
    posted by hippybear at 5:57 PM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Hey, homophobes, bigots and right-wing Christianists, how can you not see the true love and real 'family values' in these photographs of actor Matt Bomer (White Collar), his partner Simon Halls and their three adorable sons?
    posted by ericb at 7:03 PM on August 4, 2012


    Even if Chick-fil-a went out of business, and even if every other single fast food restaurant actually gave money to the cause of gay marriage, to those who feel strongly on the issue, not one dime of the money will change their minds.

    the hate groups to whom they are donating money are not trying to convince anyone who feels strongly on the issue, but you already know this

    That is to say, in my mind at least (and I understand here this makes me an outlier) whether or not gay marriage is legal is not even what is important. To those who simply want it legal, it wouldn't matter, but to those who want every other single person to agree with them on the topic?

    here's a mindblowing thing: if given the choice between being treated as human beings by the law or being accepted by every single heart and mind in america, almost all the queer folks i know would love to have both but, again, if given the choice and only allowed to choose one, they would go with the former

    Money doesn't work that way.

    this is incorrect, money can (and does) influence policy as has been demonstrated in the many links in this thread you have clearly read and did not immediately dismiss

    And if every restaurant in town followed CFA's lead, and gave to Focus on the Family or whatever, would that simple act change a single mind on the other side?

    again you are demonstrating a complete failure to understand what is being done with this money and who is doing it, they are not just printing pamphlets to argue their side and handing them out in an attempt to change minds, they are leveraging their resources to work with those who make policy and to perform horrible, life-destroying atrocities in the name of love; they are out-and-out lying to people at home, and across the world they are working to aid other nations in the effort to criminalize homosexual conduct

    Nope.

    i'm fairly certain that there is a certain change going on in the mind of a teenager who is beaten by his parents and sent to a couple psyche-destroying, dehumanizing years of ex-gay therapy courtesy of Exodus International (which is one of the hate groups CFA gleefully funds) - the specific change i'm thinking of is the way his mind transforms into a sort of Jackson Pollock thing on the walls of the finished basement when he blows his brains out, but no i'm sure that in the totally real and not imaginary world you propose in which CFA is just making leaflets to try to change people's minds, they're just pissing all their money into a total waste of time

    So I guess I am wondering if Chick-fil-a is worth all this brouhaha. For either side.


    this attempt at Will Rogers folksy-wisdom sort of "gosh, look at how people carry on and neither side gets anywhere!" does kind of fall flat when you consider that one side is saying they'd like it very much if they could please be allowed to live their own private lives as they please and the other side is spending millions to work towards a return to a world in which Alan Turing's fate was par for the course, but since this has been patiently explained several times and you still cling to the insistence that this really is just about their money trying to change people's minds on an issue, i don't know, carry on i guess
    posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 7:05 PM on August 4, 2012 [14 favorites]


    and sent to a couple psyche-destroying, dehumanizing years of ex-gay therapy courtesy of Exodus International (which is one of the hate groups CFA gleefully funds)

    Exodus International has renounced ex-gay therapy.

    I get your point, but you should certainly know that things are changing, and this old target of pro-gay groups is no longer the boogeyman it used to be.
    posted by hippybear at 7:19 PM on August 4, 2012


    Okay, will someone please tell me EXACTLY what is being done with this money?


    I mean, for example, I saw on the list of "hate groups" the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Can you explain to me, in small words, what exactly makes that group a hate group?
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:30 PM on August 4, 2012


    It's right here.
    Fellowship Of Christian Athletes Conference Has "Freed" People From Homosexuality. Every year, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) holds a National College Conference that Danny Burns, the conference Program Director, described as one in which "God freed some people from homosexuality, sexual sins, addictions and even ushered newcomers into His Kingdom." Burns’ comment has since been removed from FCA’s website. [Equality Matters, 3/22/11, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, accessed 10/28/11]

    FCA Website Highlights Coach Who Was “Delivered From Homosexuality. [Fellowship of Christian Athletes, accessed 10/28/11]

    FCA Ministry Leader Application Condemns "Impure Lifestyle" of Gays. The application to become an FCA Ministry Leader requires applicants to agree with the FCA's Sexual Purity Statement, which condemns gays for engaging in an "impure lifestyle":
    God desires His children to lead pure lives of holiness. The Bible is clear in teaching on sexual sin including sex outside of marriage and homosexual acts. Neither heterosexual sex outside of marriage nor any homosexual act constitute an alternate lifestyle acceptable to God.

    While upholding God’s standard of holiness, FCA strongly affirms God’s love and redemptive power in the individual who chooses to follow Him. FCA’s desire is to encourage individuals to trust in Jesus and turn away from any impure lifestyle. [FCA Application, accessed 10/28/11]
    posted by shakespeherian at 7:33 PM on August 4, 2012 [10 favorites]


    and the other side is spending millions to work towards a return to a world in which Alan Turing's fate was par for the course

    So, are they buying and selling politicians, or are they trying to change peoples minds, with those millions? I guess that is what I am asking.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:34 PM on August 4, 2012


    By that definition, shakespeherian, anyone putting money in the collection plate of quite a number of Christian churches just gave to a "hate group" and deserves to be boycotted.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:37 PM on August 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


    It's a drop in the greasy bucket of the culture war, and people who don't want to dribble that way are advised not to give their money to it. It's very simple.
    posted by Burhanistan at 7:37 PM on August 4, 2012


    By that definition, shakespeherian, anyone putting money in the collection plate of quite a number of Christian churches just gave to a "hate group" and deserves to be boycotted.

    I agree.
    posted by shakespeherian at 7:39 PM on August 4, 2012 [16 favorites]


    So, are they buying and selling politicians, or are they trying to change peoples minds, with those millions? I guess that is what I am asking.

    Change the law and you eventually change people's minds. How many people have you heard spout the whole "marijuana is a gateway drug that eventually leads to heroin addiction and death" canard? That's nearly entirely a fabrication of the drug war and legislation which goes back to the first third of the last century.

    Buy the politicians, get them to pass some laws, eventually the general public mindset will incorporate the nonsense which is associated with those unjust laws.

    By that definition, shakespeherian, anyone putting money in the collection plate of quite a number of Christian churches just gave to a "hate group" and deserves to be boycotted.

    Yes, this is exactly true, and it's good that you recognize this fact.
    posted by hippybear at 7:40 PM on August 4, 2012 [11 favorites]


    What is truly shocking is that a lot of these hate groups known as churches are afforded tax-exempt status by the Government under the basis that they will not work to support specific legislation or candidates.

    That so many of them ignore this is something I wish the IRS and the Justice Department would look into a bit more closely.
    posted by hippybear at 7:41 PM on August 4, 2012 [8 favorites]


    By that definition, shakespeherian, anyone putting money in the collection plate of quite a number of Christian churches just gave to a "hate group" and deserves to be boycotted.

    Never have truer words been spoken above that username.
    posted by oneswellfoop at 7:41 PM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    In other words, Chick-fil-a is just the whipping boy.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:42 PM on August 4, 2012


    I mean, for example, I saw on the list of "hate groups" the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.

    Did you? Where? I did a search for "fellowship" in this thread and the only comments containing a reference to Fellowship of Christian Athletes were...yours, actually. Where was it called a hate group? By whom? Was it in this thread? Not a rhetorical question.

    That is one of the groups CFA donates to, via WinShape (Winshape is a part of CFA). There are others. I think you're confused, maybe?
    posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 7:43 PM on August 4, 2012


    FAMOUS MONSTER, I saw it on a link somewhere else when I was trying to research just who they had given money to. It wasn't in this thread. I googled "Chick-fil-a give" and went from there.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:45 PM on August 4, 2012


    No, Chick-fil-a is a private business, which isn't afforded the same tax-exempt status as churches, and which provides goods in exchange for money, which churches generally don't do.

    CFA is an example of a private business which is invested in public causes which support agendas that run in parallel to the policies of many churches.

    But don't confuse one for the other.
    posted by hippybear at 7:45 PM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    In other words, Chick-fil-a is just the whipping boy.

    It's certainly not unique in terms of American organizations and persons that support bigotry, if that's what you mean.

    Look, I understand that you disagree about various things in this conversation and are in a weird place because you're sorta forbidden from talking about it, but try to look at it from our perspective, here: Imagine that there is an organization that claims it can 'cure' people of the terrible sin of interracial attraction, that makes public statements claiming that interracial attraction is sinful and against God's will, and which gives chunks of cash to advocate for making interracial marriage illegal. And then a fast-food chain gives that organization a bunch of money, and people say 'That's terrible, why would they do that, I don't want to eat there anymore' and then a bunch of other people say 'Pah, I support free speech!' and they all go to that fast food restaurant and give it more money to give to the organization that refers to interracial relationships as aberrations and emblematic of the lost nature of American culture. Imagine how you feel about that.
    posted by shakespeherian at 7:47 PM on August 4, 2012 [9 favorites]


    Wait what? I'm not supposed to want to gay marry Darius Rucker?

    Well, sheeit.
    posted by hippybear at 7:51 PM on August 4, 2012


    Well, I never said I blamed those of you on that side of the issue for being perturbed about it. In your shoes I would be as well.


    But as you know, my shoes are a bit different....but they are also shoes that are a bit different than many on that side of the equation. Please understand that I am truly trying to work out what is the most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on this all is. My deal is that I have to work it out with my Maker, not other people's opinions. And if that isn't enough people-on BOTH sides-have such kneejerk reactions to the topic that when I try to discuss it IRL it is an exercise most times in deep frustration.
    posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:57 PM on August 4, 2012


    Right, my only point was to remind you of how it looks from over here.
    posted by shakespeherian at 8:02 PM on August 4, 2012 [2 favorites]


    Please understand that I am truly trying to work out what is the most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on this all is.
    34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the
    Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law,
    tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest
    commandment in the Law?”
    37 Jesus replied: “Love the Lord your God with all your
    heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is
    the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like
    it: Love your neighbor as yourself. 40 All the Law and the
    Prophets hang on these two commandments.” MATTHEW 22;34-40
    Surely the bolded bit? Or as Bill and Ted say: "Be excellent to each other."

    I would expect that such would mean not having a cow about people who aren't hurting anyone by being "different"?
    posted by MissySedai at 8:08 PM on August 4, 2012 [6 favorites]


    Empathy is a foreign concept to the likes of evangel bornie nuts. Until they experience a choice directly for themselves, they are utterly incapable of allowing that others might make the same choice.

    And even then, having made the sinful choice they previously protested, they'll go back to protesting it! They comprise the sole exception!!

    cf. the only good abortion is my (anti-abortionist) abortion.

    I tell you this: If it ain't affecting your person or property, it is none of your business.

    A compassionate person might mind their own business when told to do so. Let your god issues manage your life, let me manage mine.
    posted by five fresh fish at 8:38 PM on August 4, 2012 [4 favorites]


    Buy chicken offsets!
    I love the chicken sandwiches at Chick-fil-A. But I also like my gay-married friends and don't like the guilt of indirectly supporting Chick-fil-A's stance on gay rights. And I know there are lots of other people in the same boat. So I've started ChickenOffset.com. Every time you buy a chicken-sandwich meal at Chick-fil-A, you can buy an "offset" here. You can print out the receipt and demonstrate to your friends that the money you gave for LGBT youth more than compensates for the profits you put in Chick-fil-A's coffers. $1 gets you 1 chicken-meal offset; $6 for ten offsets. We promise to send a minimum of 80% of the proceeds after expenses to It Gets Better and the Williams Institute.
    From their FAQ:
    Surely you can't be serious.
    I think chicken offsets are just as legitimate as carbon offsets, and those are the most serious things in the world.
    posted by grouse at 9:38 PM on August 4, 2012 [3 favorites]


    But as you know, my shoes are a bit different....but they are also shoes that are a bit different than many on that side of the equation. Please understand that I am truly trying to work out what is the most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on this all is.

    You know, I was kind of working on a fairly extensive but sangfroid obliteration of whatever the hell point you were trying to make above, and then, I don't know. I hit "show" and saw this and here we are. I'm not a complete monster. Well, okay, yes I am, but you know. I get it.

    There's a whole crapload of information in this thread and wherever you might care to look. It's all worth considering, it's maybe even a bit overwhelming, and like I say, I get it. I get why a lot of it is sailing by you - it's uncomfortable to have to deal with a mental conflict like this. For the human brain - a phenomenal but imperfect computer - it's easier to just...not. Hy Brasil is not sinking. Et cetera.

    I mean, on the one hand you have (what appears to be) a pretty clear Biblical directive on this, and on the other hand you've got the lived experience of yourself and the people around you - the gay folks you're friends with, and the people at church, and you know what? I might get frequently frustrated here, but I don't think you're stupid. I think it might be something that happens a lot in Evangelical circles that someone hears outspoken leaders of the movement barf up completely vile fictions as part of an an effort to rid the world of queers, one way or another, and starts to wonder if maybe they might just not be on the right side of history here.

    It's insane the way that a gay person is expected to discuss politely on the topic of whether or not they should be second-class citizens. It's mind-blowing. It's bizarre when people with privilege just sort of shrug and say "Hey, you know, you have your opinion and I have mine." If you don't have to deal with the million little ways the world leans against you when you're gay then it's not quite obvious how much this feels like an armed robber saying, "Well, we can agree to disagree about whether or not you get to have your wallet." It's crazy.

    I honestly and truly believe that CFA is run by bigots, and money spent at their restaurant will then be given to other bigots for the purposes of carrying out hateful acts against a whole class of people who have done nothing wrong - except for love someone in a way these bigots don't approve of.

    I don't believe they deserve my money. If the KKK holds a bake sale, I don't care how good their brownies are. They're not getting a cent from me. This is not a small issue to me. Others have tried to cloud this by comparing it to taxes, but I have a very easy, consequence-free choice of either giving CFA money or not, and I choose not.

    They're not on my team. They're not on your team, either. They're not your fellows in Christ. They're rich people, full of condescending hatred and prejudice, who are using their religion as a cover for their fear of the unknown, the outsider.

    So you know what? I honestly mean this: I don't care if you think I'm going to hell. Never did. Never will. I just don't care. I would happily sit down and tip a Dark and Stormy and break bread with you and laugh and tell stories and look you in the eye and know that you might very well believe in your heart of hearts that upon my death I will be told Depart from Me etc. and spend the rest of eternity in a fryolator filled with diarrhea and razorblades and I would not give a rip about that last detail, not a tiny rip of any sort, not a jot nor a tittle. I honestly would think no less of you for it, because it is not something that matters to me. If it turns out to be true that one of the joys of Heaven is watching the torments of the damned then I'll make sure to try to make a funny face or tell some jokes while I'm sizzling down there and you can tell Mister Rogers you know me from the internet. I don't say that to be hostile, because it is not a hostile thought. Sitting at that table, here and now on Earth, I care who brought the dessert. I care who's making the next round of drinks and who's telling the next story.

    I care about what you do.

    This thread contains countless links about where your money goes when you give CFA business. Check them out. Decide for yourself if they deserve your money.

    If you decide, "Well okay but I still want to give them my money," then honestly...all right. Just accept that some folks aren't really going to see a middle ground between that decision and a belief in their basic humanity, and that this will be true for them in a way that will be hard for you to see if you're not gay.

    If you decide not to fund bigotry, then awesome! You're on my side and that's great, because I'm right and also I'm very pretty. You can think it's a sin for some dude to suck a thick, sweaty dick if that's what your heart tells you to think. You're still on that dude's side here if you'd prefer that he be allowed to live that way without bigots going on the radio and saying gay dudes are pedophiles, and you choose not to give money where you know it'll be used to fund those bigots. Frankly, if that's your approach, I'd rather have one of you than a hundred of the people who claim to be all for gay rights but still insist that I tell them it's okay for them eat at CFA despite knowing where that money goes.

    If you decide to investigate the strange noises coming from the old gold mine, turn to page 46.
    posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 9:52 PM on August 4, 2012 [50 favorites]


    Goddamn I ♥ FAMOUS MONSTER. Spot on!
    posted by ericb at 10:48 PM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    If it turns out to be true that one of the joys of Heaven is watching the torments of the damned then I'll make sure to try to make a funny face or tell some jokes while I'm sizzling down there and you can tell Mister Rogers you know me from the internet.

    quoted for fucking beauty
    Thank you FAMOUS MONSTER
    posted by hap_hazard at 10:57 PM on August 4, 2012 [1 favorite]


    I looked, and I don't see where he said "everyone who eats there is a bigot and should be yelled at", and yet that is what is being responded to.

    It was here:
    At this point, given the coverage this subject has received, if you give Chick-Fil-A money, you know that this money will be used for anti-gay political advocacy and that you are actively, willingly taking part in a collective effort to separate me from my rights.

    This is the difference between opinion and action:

    Opinion: You state public agreement with Cathy's political agenda. This is protected by the First Amendment.

    Action: You are actively, of your volition, going to this business and patronizing it, in order to provide financial support to Cathy, which supports his political agenda. That political agenda includes acting in a coordinated fashion with other like-minded people to pass laws to eliminate my rights (such as the end results of DOMA and Prop 8). Taking away my Constitutional rights is — usually, not always — against my Constitutional rights.
    To me, that implies that "everyone who goes to Chik-fil-a is actively patronizing it in order to provide financial support to Cathy, and moreover, that they want to do so." My response to Blazecock was simply expressing skepticism with the all-or-nothing nature of this claim.

    If I am reading that wrong, BP, please do correct me on that point.
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:28 AM on August 5, 2012




    But as you know, my shoes are a bit different....but they are also shoes that are a bit different than many on that side of the equation. Please understand that I am truly trying to work out what is the most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on this all is.

    It doesn't matter what shoes you wear. Just stop kicking people with them.
    posted by Sys Rq at 11:39 AM on August 5, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Please understand that I am truly trying to work out what is the most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on this all is.

    The most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on all this is to love everyone with all your heart and soul and being, caring for their welfare as if it were your own, and to let each person face Judgement Day on their own personal terms with YHWH. There is no commandment to judge or try to change any life that is not your own. The only commandments under Christ are to love -- Love God and Love Your Neighbor. If you're not doing those things, you're not doing it right.
    posted by hippybear at 12:21 PM on August 5, 2012 [7 favorites]


    39 And the second is like
    it: Love your neighbor as yourself. 40 All the Law and the
    Prophets hang on these two commandments.” MATTHEW 22;34-40

    Surely the bolded bit? Or as Bill and Ted say: "Be excellent to each other."


    Sometimes it seems that the history of Christianity consists of trying to dilute this message with Pauline puritanism, hierarchical self-justification, and other bullshit.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 12:22 PM on August 5, 2012 [2 favorites]


    I wish I could channel Famous Monster when arguing with some of the bigoted or uninformed opinions I've encountered of late. Masterful, bravo!
    posted by arcticseal at 12:47 PM on August 5, 2012


    caring for their welfare as if it were your own

    This is the thing that seems to trip a lot of people up. Many people - not just Christians or theists, either - take this to mean "Try to bully or lecture or otherwise make you stop doing the thing I see as perilous [to your life on Earth and also in the afterlife], because if I were doing something perilous, I would want someone to try to stop me."
    posted by rtha at 1:02 PM on August 5, 2012 [2 favorites]


    "But as you know, my shoes are a bit different....but they are also shoes that are a bit different than many on that side of the equation. Please understand that I am truly trying to work out what is the most compassionate Biblical viewpoint on this all is."

    Alia, I am queer, both in my gender and orientation, and have given this a lot of thought. When you say that you have already wrestled with this I absolutely believe you, but this question is important to me and I hope that I can ask you to walk through just 5,600 wordsA in my shoes. With any spiritual concern as important as this one, it is best to start with the absolute rock bottom core of Christian doctrine, the punch-line of the Sermon on the Mount that is Matthew 7, wherein Jesus provides explicit instructions about how to go about asking questions of scripture and to recognize those with false teachings. I'm sure you know it well, but to help everyone else follow along,
    Matthew 7: 1“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

    7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. 9 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

    13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

    15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

    21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’


    24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” 28 When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29 because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.
    Jesus says that His teachings, by definition, cannot be like a bad tree that bears bad fruit. Yet, here we are surrounded by people deeply affected the festering and sour fruit of the teachings on homosexuality espoused by Chick-Fil-A. That it is so hard to square your conscience with this teaching should be a sign. To be clear, I am absolutely not saying that honest biblical exegesis should be easy, many of Jesus' most clear teachings are anything but easy; such as loving your enemies, laying down your life for your neighbors, turning the other check, giving up wealth and security for the poor, and being willing to give generously even to those who oppress you. However, these are all teachings that, even in their difficulty, affirm the dignity and value of human life while projecting love and compassion. You already know that Chick-Fil-A's viewpoint does not project the same love or compassion, and their hypocrisy is transparent. In trying to regulate the lives around him to make them appear holy, Cathy is acting to force them to clean the outside of their cups even while leaving the insides filthy. In espousing family values while working to destroy gay families he is like a Pharisee who goes so far as to tithe one tenth of tiniest detail of income, even unto the spices growing on his windowsill, to the temple but robs widows of their houses in a way still in keeping with the letter of the law. By claiming to support life while giving money to organizations that seek death for homosexuals in Uganda he is like a whitewashed tomb, painted and pretty on the outside but rotting and unclean on the inside. [Matthew 23 B] You have mentioned before that you intimately know at least one long term gay couple and, as you seem like the kind of lady who has good taste in friends, surely you must have seen the good fruit that the compassion, love, devotion in their relationship has provided for them, as well as the effects that the bad fruit of teachings like Chick-Fil-A's have had on their lives. If we are going to take what Jesus says seriously, that bad fruit does not come from good trees, then we must question, as you seem to be already, the biblical authority that these teachings have, or at least hold them to a very high standard of biblical evidence.

    I'm sure much of this is familiar to you, but please humor me and lets examine it in its entirety,

    The account of creation in the opening chapters of Genesis is often cited as the lynch pin holding together arguments against the acceptability of same sex unions. In chapter two it describes how in the beginning God made Adam and Eve, a man and a woman. However, I think this account deserves more attention. The first two chapters of Genesis describe how God made the heavens and the earth, plants and animals, us, and everything else and in this account God takes particular care to describe everything they make as either good or very good. That is, except for one thing, one flaw in creation that God describes as not good but is sure to fix right away. [Genesis 2:8] "The Lord God said, It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” Yes, the suitable partner that God provided for Adam was Eve, a woman, and for the majority of your neighbors someone of the opposite sex is a suitable partner just like in the account. However, for many of your neighbors someone of the opposite gender simply isn't a suitable partner, and to say that the opposing genders is what is important about this story is a pretty superficial reading of it. You already know that for gay people, the only suitable partner is another gay person of the same gender, and I'm sure that you have seen that a gay partner is suitable in all of the important ways that a straight partner is. Yet the necessary consequence of Chick-Fil-A's doctrine is the only thing that God declared to be not good about their creation, and even set about fixing, loneliness. The fruit of this teaching is to deprive your neighbors of the ability to give their love and companionship to someone they love deeply.B In this way Chick-Fil-A's doctrine declares to be good the only thing that God declared to be not good, and is thus fundamentally is set against the work of God. Clearly something here is wrong, so lets look more closely at the seven passages in the Bible that are even casually related to same sex attraction. I think you will find, like I did, that these teaching are anachronisms to the Bible (like that cell phone in the Patriot movie), and unrelated to what the authors were communicating.

    1| The first passage is directly related to the second chapter of Genesis where Jesus appears to confirm the male female dichotomy while condemning divorce.
    3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?” 4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
    Jesus doesn't seem to be making room for gay couples here, but it is important to keep in mind that there were no gay couples in a modern sense to make room for. Besides, as Paul latter said to the Galatians,
    26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
    2| In Genesis 18-19 is the story of Sodom and Gomorrah that should be at least roughly familiar to most of us. In chapter 18 God mentions his plans to destroy the two cities for their wickedness to Abraham, but Abraham bargains God down to only destroying them if everyone inside is just as wicked as the whole. Then in chapter 19, God sends to messengers to Sodom to investigate where they are met by Abraham's relative Lot at the gate. Before letting them in, Lot insists on hosting them in his house rather than allowing them to sleep in the square as was their plan, and it soon becomes apparent why. Before nightfall, the whole rest of the two cities rose up and surrounded the house demanding that Lot release the two messengers so that they could be gang-raped. The messengers then strike the whole crowd with blindness, allowing them, Lot, and his family to escape before God destroys the cities with fire and brimstone. This story was never interpreted as being related to homosexuality or even sexuality in general, even if there is a sexual component, until the middle ages. Indeed, many still might argue that since the crowds in the story were men who wanted to rape men that at the vary least their same sex attractions were an aspect of the sin that God soon punished them for. However, this interpretation, which gave rise to the familiar term sodomy, is anachronistic to medieval gay panic and not how the story's original readers would have interpreted it. In the day, gang-rape of men by groups of men was a common tactic of domination and humiliation in war, and was not a sexual act so much as an act of aggression in victory. In ancient times they did not have a concept of gay or straight and there really is no reason to think that the men of Sodom were gay, or even necessarily attracted to men. That was not their sin, and the Bible does refer back Sodom more than twenty times and is often quite explicit about what their sins were, but never mentions same-sex anything. For example Ezekiel 16 calls their sin arrogance, while Jesus calls their sin inhospitableness to disciples in Matthew 10 and Luke 10. Only Jude 7 relates their sin to "sexual immorality", using a word I will get back to in a bit. Regardless, gang-rape is not what Chick-Fil-A is opposing here, they are standing in opposition to relationships like mine and like your friends' that you know to be loving, healthy, and not based on coercion.

    3 & 4| But Blasdelb what about the passages in Leviticus you might ask, what part of thou shalt not must I not understand? Lets look more closely at that whole chapter and more generally what Leviticus is is all about. The book is the section of the Tanakh, or the Pentateuch, related most to the maintenance of religious, economic, and vital purity as well as rudimentary public health measures, appropriate practices for ritual sacrifice, and rules for priests. It prescribes many of the 613 rules in the Tanakh and they are mostly the ones related to what makes one a Jew. Here is the text of chapter 18 specifically,
    The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘I am the Lord your God. 3 You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. 4 You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the Lord your God. 5 Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them. I am the Lord.

    6 “‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the Lord. 7 “‘Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her. 8 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father. 9 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere. 10 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter; that would dishonor you. 11“‘Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father’s wife, born to your father; she is your sister. 12 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s sister; she is your father’s close relative. 13 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your mother’s sister, because she is your mother’s close relative. 14 “‘Do not dishonor your father’s brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt. 15 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son’s wife; do not have relations with her. 16 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your brother’s wife; that would dishonor your brother. 17 “‘Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness. 18 “‘Do not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.

    19 “‘Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period, this is an abomination. 20 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor’s wife and defile yourself with her.

    21 “‘Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molek, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord.

    22 “‘Do not lie down with a man as one does with a woman; that is an abomination.

    23 “‘Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.

    24 “‘Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled. 25 Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26 But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, 27 for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled. 28 And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you.

    29 “‘Everyone who does any of these abominations—such persons must be cut off from their people. 30 Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am the Lord your God. ’”
    For many, this prohibition in verse 22 along with the later prescription of death for violators in Leviticus 20, is the end of the conversation. However, it is of fundamentally secondary importance to the passages in the epistles of Paul as their place in Leviticus makes them inapplicable to Christians. To say that Christians must blindly follow this or any of the other laws relating to diet or sacrifice is to ignore the instructions of Jesus in the gospels, the consensus of the early church in Acts, and the instructions of Paul. In Christian doctrine, Leviticus is outvoted. Paul goes so far to say that it is better to ignore the law entirely than to blindly follow it, as one cannot make ones self holy enough in the eyes of God with them, and they are thus a distraction from the message of Jesus. This is supported by the consensus reached at the Council of Jerusalem in 49 CE found in Acts 15 which stated that even the most central parts of the law and Jewish identity no longer applied to gentile Christians. Indeed, Christians have never regarded other things prohibited in Leviticus as the least bit sinful, from the eating of pork and shrimp to the planting of more than one type of seed in a field. There is no reason to pull out these two verses as the only ones that still apply, at least beyond homophobia and bigotry. But why were they there in the first place if God didn't mean it you might ask, and if it was an abomination then, how could it be a good thing now?

    The term that is translated as abomination in Hebrew, (תֹּועֵבָה) might be better translated as the polynesian word 'taboo' and does not carry connotations of objective badness so much as badness in the context of a specific culture. For example Genesis 43:32 and Exodus 8:26 describe various innocuous things that are abominations (תֹּועֵבָה) to the Egyptians. The passage explicitly tells us that these rules are specific to the Israelites and not Gentiles. Hell, it also made sense for the Israelites then in a public health way that it does not now in our age of condoms and gay adoption.

    5| The most important passage in the Bible related to homosexuality is in the introduction to Roman's at the end of chapter 1. Here is the relevant section in its entirety,
    Romans 1: "18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

    21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

    24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual immorality for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

    26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

    28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."
    So thats that then right? After all, in 26-27 Paul is referring to what Christians shouldn't be doing, not Jews like in Leviticus, and it does seem awfully clear how gay sex of either variety is never 'natural' in any context. Thus even is a gay relationship is loving and committed, it is still unnatural and possibly lustful, so it can't be good right? So Paul really did intend for gay people to be alone for their entire lives, even if this is in violation of God's inherent design as related in Genesis 2? But again, lets look at what these words actually meant to Paul, the author who used them.

    It is commonly assumed that when Paul uses the term unnatural (or not phusikos) in this context that he means unnatural according to that superficial reading of Genesis 2, that heterosexuality is inherently natural while homosexuality in general is inherently unnatural. However, this contention is not really supportable in the context of the passage or the time.

    It is important to keep in mind that this passage is about God's wrath towards a sinful humanity and that the primary sin involved is specifically idolatry, while everything else follows from that. Paul is saying that believers who exchange their worship of God, which according to him they know to be intrinsic to their natures, for worship of objects, which they know to be fundamentally opposed to who they are, are setting themselves up for all sorts of grievous sin. He continues that the idolatrous apostates in question then exchanged their natural intrinsic orientations for actions that they know to be fundamentally opposed to who they are, and this context likely religious gay sex with temple prostitutes. However, he is also clearly condemning something more than just the prostitution, but the unnaturalness of the act. The specific apostates whose actions are being condemned knew their straight natures but abandoned them and exchanged acts in keeping with their natural orientations for ones that wern't. Paul’s argument about idolatry requires that there be an exchange; the idolaters are at fault is because they first knew God but then turned away from him, and in doing so exchanged God for idols. Paul’s reference to gay sex is intended to illustrate this larger sin of idolatry, but in order for this analogy to have any force, and even make sense within this argument, the people he is describing must naturally be inclined toward heterosexual relations and then abandon them in favor of relations they are not inclined toward. However, this is not the case for LGBTQ folks who are more or less permanently attracted to people of the same sex, and the argument works just as well in the opposite direction. Gay people who try to have straight relationships with people they do not love are being just as damaging to themselves. But Blasdelb, you might ask, doesn't Paul bash all gay sex specifically a few more times?

    6 & 7| He seems like he is twice more, in 1 Corinthians 6,
    9“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators (or pornos), nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate (or malakos, μαλακός), nor abusers of themselves with mankind (or arsenokoitēs, ἀρσενοκοίτης), 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
    and 1 Timothy 1
    9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers (or pornos), for them that defile themselves with mankind (or arsenokoitēs, ἀρσενοκοίτης), for menstealers (or andrapodistes, ἀνδράποδον, or slavers), for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; 11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
    I've used the KJV of 400 years ago to avoid starting from the modern controversy over the proper translation so that we can look at the greek words I bolded from loser to the beginning.

    Where Paul has traditionally been understood to be attacking homosexuality, we actually have very little idea of what he is talking about. He never once uses the greek word paiderasste, which would have meant men who have sex with men (MSM), but instead uses the word arsenokoitēs (ἀρσενοκοίτης), of which we have no context for the meaning but it is a portmanteau of the words for 'men' and 'bed'. He also uses the word malakos (μαλακός), which has been translated as effeminate but in the contexts that he is uses it doesn't have strong inherent meaning. In church history, arsenokoitēs has been variously translated as MSM, men who masturbate, men who are pimps, men who are trafficked by pimps, men who are trafficked in temple prostitution, men who take an active position in gay sex, and most anciently, men who have anal sex with folks regardless of gender.

    Really the strongest case is for men who are trafficked in temple prostitution as the Septuagint (an ancient, pre-Christian translation of the Old Testament into Greek made between the 3rd and 1st century BCE) translated the Hebrew "quadesh" in I Kings 14:24, 15:12 and 22:46 into a Greek word somewhat similar to arsenokoitēs. The idea that it means men who take an active position in gay sex is kind of a non-sequitor to what little we know about the word, and comes from an awfully aggressive translation of malakos, which appears next to it. Malakos has a lot of meanings, when referring to clothing it means thin or fine, and when referring to people it has variously meant pliable, weak willed, or without conviction and is usually used in reference to women. Many newer bibles took this to mean all gay fuckers as well as all gay fuckees, but this is pretty much a non-sequitor to what we do know about the to words. Really it makes a lot more sense to interpret them in light of the one thing that Paul brings up every single time he talks about sex, porneia (πορνείᾳ).

    Almost everything that he has to say about sex is explicitly an attack on porneia. The word has always been translated into Latin as fornication, and traditionally translated into English as 'sexual immorality.' However, Porneia in post-classical Corinthian Greek did not mean all sex outside of marriage and neither did fornication in actual Latin.

    The word porneia was related to the verb to sell, and was only ever used in one context. A porneon was a house of forced prostitution, the pornei were specifically those prostitutes who were 'owned' by a sex trafficker, and those sex traffickers were called pornoboskos, a singularly unpleasant combination with the verb that described the keeping of livestock such as cattle. Paul used the word while making two primary assertions, that the ubiquitous system of porneia fed by war and poverty was fundamentally not OK, and that a laundry list of examples were pretty much the same thing. Paul's fundamental position on sex was, in a way profoundly radical and novel for the time, strongly against the sexual trafficking of women in chattel slavery. The Pauline model for marriage is about avoiding it and those examples he gives.

    There is a solid pattern where he consistently describes sex outside of marriage as being like 'porneia' and, in the context of his time, that actually makes a lot of sense. Examples of economically independent women who did not rely on sex work in the Roman world were very few and far between, and almost exclusively widows or only daughters. In the world that Paul was trying to change, the magnitude of male privilege was such that women were fundamentally unable to exist economically independent of men. Without Pauline marriage there was no protection from being used by a partner until old and discarded to the elements; Paul stipulated headship but also repeatedly and inescapably mandates that men place their wives before themselves, that apostasy and misconduct are the only appropriate reasons for divorce, and that women are no less than men before God. The early church was flooded with women attracted by this radically feminist message that women were actually people with dignity that was inherent to them. Even today porneia is by no means gone, in absolute numbers there are more women in sexual slavery today than there have ever been at any point in human history. However, most of the women who arn't will be able to avoid it into a Pauline model marriage, some variety of post-Pauline marriage, a functionally equivalent model, or into a world made safer by them. This is Paul's legacy on sex that so many Christians have forgotten and discarded, not hating on people who want to join it in their own way or god forbid chicken sandwiches.



    A Wow this got long

    B One thing I think that we often communicate poorly to Christian communities is how gay love and gay marriage is no different from the straight varieties in that it is as much about the right to give the thousands of things involved in marriage like health insurance and citizenship, as the right to get them. I want the right to be supported by my community in giving of myself to my partner, regardless of what shape their genitals might take.

    C Now "Woe to you", or ouai in the greek dialect that Matthew was written in, does not mean a pleasant warning of future misfortune. Really, according to the gospel, Jesus is saying FUCK YOU to these preachers in no uncertain terms. He is saying that these men who dig through the law (The stuff in the Pentateuch or first five books of the old testament) looking for details they can use to accuse others of being unholy or make themselves seem more holy are actors. Matthew uses a word ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis), which up until this point had a neutral meaning without a negative connotation, to describe the actions of priests like this, who ignore the heart of the Pentateuch, taking houses from widows, while they make sure to be careful to tithe a tenth of the fruits of their house plants. The way he uses the word hypokrisis, it definitely now has a negative connotation. Jesus calls men like this painted tombs, a dead rotting corpse whitewashed and dressed up.
    posted by Blasdelb at 1:11 PM on August 5, 2012 [105 favorites]


    Did Christ say anything about pissing into the wind? These arguments have been provided to her before. It changes nothing.

    To be fair, I'm sure a lot of other people will be influenced by your thesis.
    posted by five fresh fish at 1:18 PM on August 5, 2012 [1 favorite]


    [Folks, this needs to not become a series of sermons directed at Alia, for a variety of reasons. The positions have been well-covered - please try to move in a more general direction from here on out. ]
    posted by restless_nomad at 1:22 PM on August 5, 2012


    "Did Christ say anything about pissing into the wind?"

    Matthew 7:6, though there is also lots of pissing against the wall in the Tanakh

    "To be fair, I'm sure a lot of other people will be influenced by your thesis."

    THESIS, shit I need to get back on that...
    posted by Blasdelb at 1:37 PM on August 5, 2012 [5 favorites]


    This is the thing that seems to trip a lot of people up. Many people - not just Christians or theists, either - take this to mean "Try to bully or lecture or otherwise make you stop doing the thing I see as perilous [to your life on Earth and also in the afterlife], because if I were doing something perilous, I would want someone to try to stop me."

    Right.. I'm aware of this.

    And my own, quite personal moment of realization about how that's a wrong-headed move is too long and complicated for me to explain here.

    Suffice it to say, a lot of it has to do with understanding an implicit "in this moment" or something similar into the commandment to love.

    If you're starving and in need of food, you don't need lectures about anything, you just need food. If you're wounded and in need of medical care, you don't require an in-depth analysis of what life path led to you injury, you simply need medical care. If you're naked and in need of shelter, your immediate needs do not involve examining your state of spiritual health and salvation, they are blatantly obvious and easy to provide -- clothing and shelter.

    Anyone approaching the commandment to Love with an attachment clause which includes Correction Of The Other doesn't understand radically deep and broad Love on a level which is truly life-changing for both giver and receiver.

    Just my little hippie self talking, but I learned a fuckton more about Radical Love from hippies than I ever did when I was participating in a christian church.
    posted by hippybear at 2:33 PM on August 5, 2012 [5 favorites]


    Chick-Fil-A uses a notoriously barbaric chicken supplier (Pilgrim's Pride) that employs the most inhumane chicken farming practices, such as destruction of male chicks, tiny wire cages, over-crowding, filthy conditions and, uses the practice of debeaking of newborn chicks, that causes the birds excruciating and continual pain until slaughtered.

    http://nomorefowlplay.org/home/
    posted by Skygazer at 2:49 PM on August 5, 2012 [1 favorite]




    A post from my favorite Evangelical Christian blogger on the topic of why anyone claiming to be supporting Chick-Fil-A because of threats to free speech is lying: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/08/05/fred-phelps-why-it-is-not-possible-to-believe-that-you-ate-chick-fil-a-because-of-freedom-of-speech/
    posted by sotonohito at 7:11 AM on August 6, 2012


    Rrrgg. Link
    posted by sotonohito at 7:12 AM on August 6, 2012


    Does that mean you all support killing union leaders? Or does it mean that you want a tasty drink, and are exhausted by the sheer amount of people who support something you don't believe in?

    corb, there is a difference between Coca-Cola and what Chick-fil-A is doing. Coca-Cola and other acts of modern corporate wrongs that occur are found out everyday. Notice that I said they are "found out" because most of the time these corporations perform some sort of cover up or denial, because they KNOW what they are doing is wrong. There's not even the facade of shame or guilt from Chick-fil-A. In this instance my father would say that is not only Chick-fil-A "eating lunch", but it's the way that it's eating lunch that causes this sort of reaction.

    Dan Cathy wants to have his chicken and eat it too. He uses his influence that he gained from Chick-fil-A as a way to promote an anti-same sex marriage message, yet wants to keep the company "neutral". But then, when customers go to support Dan Cathy's message, the restaurant doesn't do anything about it and reaps the profits.

    And because Dan Cathy has failed not to keep his "business" separate from his business, I have decided to stop eating there. I don't want to deal with ethical and moral issues when I do something as simple as eat. It's too easy to get indigestion that way.
    posted by FJT at 7:58 AM on August 6, 2012


    First Uganda gay pride a success despite police raid

    The event was well attended, despite the fact that in Uganda gay people face life imprisonment according to law and widespread homophobia from the public.


    Fuck you very much for all your hard work on this issue, Family Research Council, and other American evangelicals who decided it was the Lord's work to travel to Uganda in order to tell them how horrible and dangerous homosexuals are in need of medical care and treatment we are. Please stop helping us.

    FRC does not support the Uganda bill, and does not support the death penalty for homosexuality – nor any other penalty which would have the effect of inhibiting compassionate pastoral, psychological, and medical care and treatment for those who experience same-sex attractions or who engage in homosexual conduct.
    posted by rtha at 9:30 AM on August 6, 2012


    Sotonohito, the logic in that slacktivist post is terrible. If you can point to one person whose freedoms aren't being attacked, that proves no one's are?

    The people who claim to be supporting Chick-Fil-A in defense of free speech (or freedom of religion) are wrong, but not for that reason (and being wrong or stupid or inconsistent doesn't necessarily make you a liar).
    posted by straight at 11:10 AM on August 6, 2012 [1 favorite]




    The point, straight, is that if Fred Phelps, of all people, is free and saying his stuff then no one is being silenced for being mean to gay people; because Phelps is where we'd start if we wanted to silence anti-gay voices.

    It's simple logic: is Cathy worse than Phelps? No. Is Phelps free? Yes. Ergo Cathy's freedom is not threatened. I don't see a logical problem there.
    posted by sotonohito at 11:50 AM on August 6, 2012 [2 favorites]


    No that's dumb. It's like saying there's no such thing as racism because Oprah. Surely the racists would go after her first since she's so visible and successful?

    Or Obama? If racists will let a black man get elected president, surely you can't claim that they'd bother discriminating against a black guy who just wants to be a Senior Partner at the law firm?
    posted by straight at 12:22 PM on August 6, 2012 [1 favorite]


    It's a fair point, but only if you understand that freedom of speech is about the government not prosecuting you for saying things it doesn't like – Phelps is not being prosecuted for being a horrible person and yelling “GOD HATES FAGS” to the rooftops, because there is no law against that. But some people seem to think “freedom of speech” means a right not to be publicly shamed for being a total asshole, and under that definition, the campaign against Cathy is definitely a threat to his freedom of speech assholery.
    posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:33 PM on August 6, 2012 [3 favorites]


    Sure, I agree that the Chick-Fil-A fans are totally wrong claiming they're standing up for religious freedom or freedom of speech. I was just taking issue with slacktivist's logic. It's just not true that persecution always goes after the most visible targets first.

    And if you wanted to discredit and marginalize religious opposition to gay marriage, would you shut down Fred Phelps or give him more publicity? I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't conservatives who think he's fake like Landover Baptist.
    posted by straight at 12:38 PM on August 6, 2012 [1 favorite]


    No that's dumb. It's like saying there's no such thing as racism because Oprah. Surely the racists would go after her first since she's so visible and successful?

    No, the argument isn't that Phelps is a bigot so if bigots are oppressed surely Phelps would be. It's that if Phelps is the worst possible bigot, so loud and clearly disliked even by many on his own side, and with little power or wealth, he would be the first to feel the iron fist of censorship, not Cathy. If we were talking about Malcolm X and there was no evidence of prejudice or oppression against him, then the argument would be analogous. But Oprah and Obama are closer to Cathy, mainstream and powerful or wealthy (or both).
    posted by Mental Wimp at 12:46 PM on August 6, 2012




    Canadian spicy chicken "Chick-Felay" chain deals with mistaken complaints from customers.

    Live by the trademark infringement, die by the trademark infringement.
    posted by grouse at 1:08 PM on August 6, 2012 [4 favorites]




    Sh*t Chick-fil-A Supporters Say.
    posted by ericb at 3:25 PM on August 6, 2012


    Blasdelb: " A Wow this got long"

    But well worth the read. Thanks! :)
    posted by zarq at 3:54 PM on August 6, 2012 [1 favorite]


    Allen West Sends Chick-Fil-A To Black Caucus Meeting And Offends Everyone, Says Dem Rep.

    Christ. What an Asshole (with a capital A)!
    posted by ericb at 1:24 PM on August 7, 2012


    To be fair, he did it six months ago, and they appear freakishly sensitive on the subject of their lunches. (Down to saying no watermelon is ever served? Really? One stereotype and an innocent fruit gets banned forever?)
    posted by corb at 1:41 PM on August 7, 2012


    I read the watermelon thing as a bit of dry wit, corb.
    posted by vorfeed at 2:19 PM on August 7, 2012


    Allen West: I Came To Chicago To 'Open Up A Chick-Fil-A Franchise' (VIDEO).

    Christ. What an Asshole (with a capital A)!
    posted by ericb at 2:50 PM on August 7, 2012


    To be fair, West is as crazy as Bachmann.
    posted by homunculus at 2:55 PM on August 7, 2012


    Wow. That's bats.
    posted by rtha at 3:13 PM on August 7, 2012


    Oh yeah, West is crazy as hell, I'm just saying if you want to look for examples of West being an asshole, the torture is probably way better than "he served Chick-Fil-A once."
    posted by corb at 6:54 PM on August 7, 2012






    Pat Robertson on Chick-fil-A : Gays Should Either Perform an Ass-Birth or 'Shut Their Mouths'.

    Oh, Pat, never stop. The entertainment value you provide almost makes up for the hate you inject into the world.
    posted by Mental Wimp at 4:48 AM on August 11, 2012


    I didn't know Pat Robertson was into m-preg fanfic! I could send him some recommendations.
    posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:46 AM on August 11, 2012


    Man Sets General Mills' Lawn on Fire in Anti-Gay Cheerio Protest
    posted by homunculus at 11:49 AM
    Anti-Gay Marriage Protestor Who Set Fire On General Mills Lawn Dies
    posted by blueberry at 11:22 AM on August 16, 2012


    At the same time, the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center has classified some WinShape-backed organizations, such as the Family Research Council, as anti-gay hate groups.

    Family Research Council Blames Shooting On Prominent Civil Rights Group
    posted by homunculus at 1:25 PM on August 16, 2012 [1 favorite]




    « Older The only search results on mefi for "Ling Long"...   |   The Modern Prometheus Newer »


    This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



    Post