• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF

jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
(07-29-2012, 10:25 PM)
jstevenson's Avatar
I just don't understand the strategy here. Chik-Fil-A is an organization so principled it gives up millions of dollars a year to be closed on Sunday. What's the purpose of the boycott/kiss-ins/demonstrations? To hurt their revenue? They aren't motivated by that. If their revenue goes down, it's probably a badge of honor to them for sticking to their principles. If it stays the same or goes up (which I think is more likely due to exposure / riling up the religious right), then it reinforces their principles to them even more.

Folks have every right to protest (and Chik Fil A has every right to support the politicians / policies / principles - as long as they don't discriminate in their stores or break the law - yay 1st amendement), but regardless, it feels like it's a lot of effort that isn't really going to hurt or effect chik-fil-a, and even if it does, chik-fil-a would rather be hurt sticking to its principles than break from them for the sake of business expediency.

I guess I just don't get it. Feels like all the effort would be better spent going towards demonstrations to change / law and policy instead of going after the chicken stand that's closed on Sunday. Maybe it's just the culture war.
Last edited by jstevenson; 07-29-2012 at 10:28 PM.
Acerac
Joe's Significant Otter
(07-29-2012, 10:30 PM)
Acerac's Avatar

Originally Posted by Wilsongt

Psst. I think Chris25 is gay... Unless he is one of those rare, elusive, straight guys who is part of PopGAF.

Whether or not he's gay he claimed he was done with this thread well over a thousand posts ago when multiple people pointed out how absurd he was being. Since then he's just been making drive by posts to antagonize those who are against Chick Fil A.
Cyan
Purple Drazi
(07-29-2012, 10:32 PM)
Cyan's Avatar

Originally Posted by jstevenson

I just don't understand the strategy here. Chik-Fil-A is an organization so principled it gives up millions of dollars a year to be closed on Sunday. What's the purpose of the boycott/kiss-ins/demonstrations? To hurt their revenue? They aren't motivated by that. If their revenue goes down, it's probably a badge of honor to them for sticking to their principles. If it stays the same or goes up (which I think is more likely due to exposure / riling up the religious right), then it reinforces their principles to them even more.

Folks have every right to protest (and Chik Fil A has every right to support the politicians / policies / principles - as long as they don't discriminate in their stores or break the law - yay 1st amendement), but regardless, it feels like it's a lot of effort that isn't really going to hurt or effect chik-fil-a, and even if it does, chik-fil-a would rather be hurt sticking to its principles than break from them for the sake of business expediency.

It's not a lot of effort. And even if Chick fila sticks to their guns:

Originally Posted by empty vessel

Even if the boycott itself fails to change the company's behavior, the noise being made over it only helps and constitutes a warning to other businesses looking to leverage and marshal their business earnings in the political arena. Sometimes it's good enough just raising hell, especially when it's loud.

Sotha Sil
Member
(07-29-2012, 10:33 PM)
Sotha Sil's Avatar

Originally Posted by jstevenson

I just don't understand the strategy here. Chik-Fil-A is an organization so principled it gives up millions of dollars a year to be closed on Sunday. What's the purpose of the boycott/kiss-ins/demonstrations? To hurt their revenue? They aren't motivated by that. If their revenue goes down, it's probably a badge of honor to them for sticking to their principles. If it stays the same or goes up (which I think is more likely due to exposure / riling up the religious right), then it reinforces their principles to them even more.

Folks have every right to protest (and Chik Fil A has every right to support the politicians / policies / principles - as long as they don't discriminate in their stores or break the law - yay 1st amendement), but regardless, it feels like it's a lot of effort that isn't really going to hurt or effect chik-fil-a, and even if it does, chik-fil-a would rather be hurt sticking to its principles than break from them for the sake of business expediency.

I guess I just don't get it. Feels like all the effort would be better spent going towards demonstrations to change / law and policy instead of going after the chicken stand that's closed on Sunday. Maybe it's just the culture war.


Those are not mutually exclusive, and it really doesn't take a lot of effort to boycott a fast food chain.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
(07-29-2012, 10:37 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson

I just don't understand the strategy here. Chik-Fil-A is an organization so principled it gives up millions of dollars a year to be closed on Sunday. What's the purpose of the boycott/kiss-ins/demonstrations? To hurt their revenue? They aren't motivated by that. If their revenue goes down, it's probably a badge of honor to them for sticking to their principles.

They'd have less money to donate to the organizations they are currently donating too.

There's a chance they'll stop donating in the first place.

Judging by their statements on their web site, that might be already happening.

Could the protesters end up causing a backfire? Sure.. but I'm really not sure why it's confusing what their motivation is. Less money for a company that supports a cause, and thus less money for that cause.

If it's effective it could scare other organizations off from such donations.

I think you are being facetious suggesting their overall motivation isn't to make money either. It clearly is their motivation.. I can walk into a Chick-fil-a and buy food, that makes them money. That's the purpose of that transaction, and I'm not preached too and nothing else occurs other than them making money from their business.
Link
The Autumn Wind
(07-29-2012, 10:39 PM)
Link's Avatar

Originally Posted by killertofu

One of my friends put
"support chick fil a on august 1st? I WILL BE THERE."

Sigh.

Just another reason I'm glad I'm not on Facebook.
statham
Banned
(07-29-2012, 10:44 PM)
statham's Avatar
Have been in the mood for chick-fil-a, went to zaxby's instead. Their chicken sandwich is awesome but not very healthy, but very very delicious. Its the only chicken sandwich I like better then the chick-fil-a sandwich. Wendy's has a great clone for the chargrilled even on a wheat bun. Haven't found a nugget substitute yet.
KtSlime
Member
(07-29-2012, 10:44 PM)
KtSlime's Avatar
I mistakenly went to their Facebook page. Now I am depressed at the state of the US. =/
CrushDance
This sh!t needs to stop?
(07-29-2012, 10:45 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson



I guess I just don't get it. Feels like all the effort would be better spent going towards demonstrations to change / law and policy instead of going after the chicken stand that's closed on Sunday. Maybe it's just the culture war.

I see what you're saying. But this story has ignited a good debate and several politicians have already weighed in on both sides. So it's not so much about bankrupting the company(impossible anyway) but about sending a message. One that is now being heavily debated. I think it's a good thing to see.
Yaboosh
Member
(07-29-2012, 10:47 PM)
Yaboosh's Avatar

Originally Posted by statham

Have been in the mood for chick-fil-a, went to zaxby's instead. Their chicken sandwich is awesome but not very healthy, but very very delicious. Its the only chicken sandwich I like better then the chick-fil-a sandwich. Wendy's has a great clone for the chargrilled even on a wheat bun. Haven't found a nugget substitute yet.


Zaxby's always used to give me the shits. And they were a ripoff of Guthries. But still good.
statham
Banned
(07-29-2012, 10:53 PM)
statham's Avatar

Originally Posted by Yaboosh

Zaxby's always used to give me the shits. And they were a ripoff of Guthries. But still good.

looked up Guthries and no locations near me. oh well.
Ghost_Protocol
Member
(07-29-2012, 10:57 PM)
Ghost_Protocol's Avatar
Will the Supreme Court decide on gay marriage before the election?
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
(07-29-2012, 10:58 PM)
jstevenson's Avatar

Originally Posted by nVidiot_Whore

They'd have less money to donate to the organizations they are currently donating too.

There's a chance they'll stop donating in the first place.

Judging by their statements on their web site, that might be already happening.

Could the protesters end up causing a backfire? Sure.. but I'm really not sure why it's confusing what their motivation is. Less money for a company that supports a cause, and thus less money for that cause.

If it's effective it could scare other organizations off from such donations.

I think you are being facetious suggesting their overall motivation isn't to make money either. It clearly is their motivation.. I can walk into a Chick-fil-a and buy food, that makes them money. That's the purpose of that transaction, and I'm not preached too and nothing else occurs other than them making money from their business.

See, I don't think they will. They'll be more careful about donations, but again, my best educated guess is that they will see their profits/revenue go up due to all of this.

And with other organizations, they'll be more careful too.

I think it's also uniting the religious right behind them.

And I never said Chik-Fil-A wasn't out to make money. I said that their principles are more important to them than making money.


Originally Posted by CrushDance

I see what you're saying. But this story has ignited a good debate and several politicians have already weighed in on both sides. So it's not so much about bankrupting the company(impossible anyway) but about sending a message. One that is now being heavily debated. I think it's a good thing to see.

Fair enough, I can see the point there - I guess it just seems fairly targeted to ignite a larger debate, but I guess if you start the fire in the right place, it can do just that.

Originally Posted by empty vessel

I just want to quote this because I think it's an important point. As a rule, I generally do not think boycotts are effective ways to regulate business behavior and prefer political organization to demand public legislation. So I will continue to patronize even companies that I think are acting unethically, because I think the solution to the problems lie elsewhere. But that does not mean that boycotts cannot be effective in certain contexts, and I think this is one of them. Even if the boycott itself fails to change the company's behavior, the noise being made over it only helps and constitutes a warning to other businesses looking to leverage and marshal their business earnings in the political arena. Sometimes it's good enough just raising hell, especially when it's loud.

I think this is also relatively valid and reasonable. Though I'm not sure that warning companies about being active in politics is necessarily a good thing (it might not be a bad thing either). It seems like companies might just try to be less transparent about it in the future and hide what they are up to. Again, a mixed bag.

Originally Posted by statham

Have been in the mood for chick-fil-a, went to zaxby's instead. Their chicken sandwich is awesome but not very healthy, but very very delicious. Its the only chicken sandwich I like better then the chick-fil-a sandwich. Wendy's has a great clone for the chargrilled even on a wheat bun. Haven't found a nugget substitute yet.

I'd kill for Zaxby's in Los Angeles. Kill. Seriously
Gaborn
Gaborn News:
Penetrating Your World™
(07-29-2012, 10:59 PM)
Gaborn's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ghost_Protocol

Will the Supreme Court decide on gay marriage before the election?

absolutely no chance whatsoever. The health care decision was the end of the term. I THINK the new term doesn't start til October but I may well be wrong.
Fantastical
Death Prophet
(07-29-2012, 11:01 PM)
Fantastical's Avatar

Originally Posted by Yaboosh

Zaxby's always used to give me the shits. And they were a ripoff of Guthries. But still good.

Eh, I just feel bad after going there sometimes, but I don't get the shits. That's just part of the experience. :P I just really like their sauce.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
(07-29-2012, 11:02 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson

See, I don't think they will. They'll be more careful about donations, but again, my best educated guess is that they will see their profits/revenue go up due to all of this.

And with other organizations, they'll be more careful too.

I think it's also uniting the religious right behind them.

I still don't see how the motives of the protesters are confusing.

You just think it will backfire. The motive is pretty clear.


And I never said Chik-Fil-A wasn't out to make money. I said that their principles are more important to them than making money.

You said they aren't motivated by money.

You suggested they'd somehow be happy if their revenue went down.

I think you are exaggerating personally. But who knows? Maybe they'll all be super happy if they end up losing revenue.

But it's not like protesters of things like this aren't well aware that the people they are protesting will act like holier-than-though sanctimonious douches no matter what the affect of their protests are.
Last edited by nVidiot_Whore; 07-29-2012 at 11:05 PM.
SouthernDragon
Member
(07-29-2012, 11:03 PM)
SouthernDragon's Avatar

Originally Posted by Link

Just another reason I'm glad I'm not on Facebook.

Get better friends.

Also, the effort required to boycott Chick-Fil-A is 0.
Ghost_Protocol
Member
(07-29-2012, 11:03 PM)
Ghost_Protocol's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gaborn

absolutely no chance whatsoever. The health care decision was the end of the term. I THINK the new term doesn't start til October but I may well be wrong.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/238533/...-supreme-court

It sounds like September is when the justices return to choose cases for review when their term starts again in October.....Too bad.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
(07-29-2012, 11:04 PM)
jstevenson's Avatar

Originally Posted by nVidiot_Whore

I still don't see how the motives of the protesters are confusing.

You just think it will backfire. The motive is pretty clear.


I get the motivation, I just don't think the strategy has been thought through. My original question was about the strategy of this.

Originally Posted by nVidiot_Whore

You said they aren't motivated by money.

You suggested they'd somehow be happy if their revenue went down.

And yes, I think that if their principles caused their revenue to go down, it would be something they'd view as an honor. For a religious person, sticking to their beliefs is far more important than a monetary gain. They still haven't started opening on Sunday. If revenue was their primary motivator, Chik-Fil-A wouldn't hose me on Sunday morning when I want a spicy chicken biscuit
KtSlime
Member
(07-29-2012, 11:06 PM)
KtSlime's Avatar

Originally Posted by jstevenson

SI think this is also relatively valid and reasonable. Though I'm not sure that warning companies about being active in politics is necessarily a good thing (it might not be a bad thing either).


They should not be active in politics at all. Politics are for humans, made of flesh and blood, capable suffering. Companies should have no say, they are nothing more than tools to develop technologies that will hopefully make life easier to live for humans.

If they want to show support for making life easier, more fair, that's totally cool. But if they want to oppose that then they should be prepared to be destroyed by the public once it wakes up.
Gaborn
Gaborn News:
Penetrating Your World™
(07-29-2012, 11:06 PM)
Gaborn's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ghost_Protocol

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/238533/...-supreme-court

It sounds like September is when the justices return to choose cases for review when their term starts again in October.....Too bad.

Even so it's VERY likely the Prop 8 decision will be very narrow and apply just to California's situation where they had established a recognized (state) Constitutional right and then tried to strip it away from people.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
(07-29-2012, 11:08 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson

And yes, I think that if their principles caused their revenue to go down, it would be something they'd view as an honor. For a religious person, sticking to their beliefs is far more important than a monetary gain. They still haven't started opening on Sunday. If revenue was their primary motivator, Chik-Fil-A wouldn't hose me on Sunday morning when I want a spicy chicken biscuit

And as someone who is protesting Chick-Fil-A?

Why should I give a shit if they pretend it's some badge of honor for them to stick to their principles?

It wouldn't be surprising in the least.. and I don't think anyone is expecting the likes of Chick-Fil-A, Huckabee, Pailin, etc. to do anything but continue to act as they do now. Holier than thou people that disgust them.

They can pretend it's some badge of honor all they want.. par for the course IMO. If they lose revenue the protest is a success.
Last edited by nVidiot_Whore; 07-29-2012 at 11:11 PM.
CrushDance
This sh!t needs to stop?
(07-29-2012, 11:17 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson


Fair enough, I can see the point there - I guess it just seems fairly targeted to ignite a larger debate, but I guess if you start the fire in the right place, it can do just that.

Of coarse!
Devolution
the fabulous one
(07-29-2012, 11:19 PM)
The Aryan Brotherhood has stood by their principles for how long? So impressive. Stick to those guns boys.
FyreWulff
I Spit Hot Fyre
(07-29-2012, 11:24 PM)
FyreWulff's Avatar

Originally Posted by Devolution

The Aryan Brotherhood has stood by their principles for how long? So impressive. Stick to those guns boys.

Now I know why they buy so much gas though.
statham
Banned
(07-29-2012, 11:30 PM)
statham's Avatar

Originally Posted by Devolution

The Aryan Brotherhood has stood by their principles for how long? So impressive. Stick to those guns boys.

please change your avatar back.
shintoki
sparkle this bitch
(07-29-2012, 11:32 PM)
shintoki's Avatar

Originally Posted by nVidiot_Whore

They can pretend it's some badge of honor all they want.. par for the course IMO. If they lose revenue the protest is a success.

Discriminated against, slander by the liberal left, kicked out of office by minorities. They will take to the streets with chicken and grease. Not defeated, but renewed with vigor for another day's fight against a world out to get them.

The opposite will most likely occur. Basically people who never eaten there before, but support their ideal of marriage will be going there now in protest. While their fans will just up their rate. They'll have a spike in sales for sure, and you know they'll be announcing that next week. It will die off after a bit, but they'll be taking in more money for sure.
Last edited by shintoki; 07-29-2012 at 11:39 PM.
Valnen
Member
(07-29-2012, 11:35 PM)
Valnen's Avatar

Originally Posted by jstevenson

I just don't understand the strategy here. Chik-Fil-A is an organization so principled it gives up millions of dollars a year to be closed on Sunday. What's the purpose of the boycott/kiss-ins/demonstrations? To hurt their revenue? They aren't motivated by that. If their revenue goes down, it's probably a badge of honor to them for sticking to their principles. If it stays the same or goes up (which I think is more likely due to exposure / riling up the religious right), then it reinforces their principles to them even more.

Folks have every right to protest (and Chik Fil A has every right to support the politicians / policies / principles - as long as they don't discriminate in their stores or break the law - yay 1st amendement), but regardless, it feels like it's a lot of effort that isn't really going to hurt or effect chik-fil-a, and even if it does, chik-fil-a would rather be hurt sticking to its principles than break from them for the sake of business expediency.

I guess I just don't get it. Feels like all the effort would be better spent going towards demonstrations to change / law and policy instead of going after the chicken stand that's closed on Sunday. Maybe it's just the culture war.

Yup. People should put their effort toward their cause in a way that actually matters.
Devolution
the fabulous one
(07-29-2012, 11:37 PM)

Originally Posted by Valnen

Yup. People should put their effort toward their cause in a way that actually matters.

Boycotts generate publicity. So do strikes. Publicity is the best kind of exposure to what certain companies are doing. These posts are hilarious.
Pimpwerx
Member
(07-29-2012, 11:41 PM)
Pimpwerx's Avatar
I've only eaten at ChickFilA once. It's meh. Pollo Tropical is probably better IMO. PEACE.
Lonewolf_92
Member
(07-29-2012, 11:50 PM)
Lonewolf_92's Avatar
Perhaps more importantly, while Chik-Fil-A itself might be able to handle a loss in revenue, most of their locations are owner-operated franchises and they might not see it as a "badge of honor", regardless of how heavily CFA screens its potential franchisees. If I owned a franchise and started to lose money directly because the franchise owners words and actions alienated present and potential customers, I'd be pissed and looking for another company to work with.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
(07-29-2012, 11:51 PM)

Originally Posted by shintoki

The opposite will most likely occur. Basically people who never eaten there before, but support their ideal of marriage will be going there now in protest. While their fans will just up their rate. They'll have a spike in sales for sure, and you know they'll be announcing that next week. It will die off after a bit, but they'll be taking in more money for sure.

We'll just have to see.

Either way, I'm not exactly sure what people expect.. so.. don't protest? Because somehow that's better?

Does any protest ever work then?

I personally just don't agree with the theory or prediction that it's going to backfire. I understand the sentiment, and where it comes from, and feel sometimes protesters certainly hurt causes more than they help.

I think it's the "support" that will be short-lived... but that Chick-Fil-A has definitely lost some customers, permanently.

But we'll see. Either way I don't think this is a case where anyone should be expecting someone not to protest because it's a more sound "strategy".. there are also messages to send, etc.

People do change their mind on issues like this, and I think more people will see the support from Huckabee/Pailin/etc. as something that they want to stay away from.. it's going to rally a "base" but potentially turn some people off who are sitting on the fence.

Hopefully, IMO.
EYEL1NER
Member
(07-30-2012, 01:05 AM)
EYEL1NER's Avatar
Ugh. Just had someone on FB invite me to the whole Aug 1st 'Mike Huckabee Chik-Fil-A' event. I was really hoping I didn't know anyone like 'that.'
Eusis
Member
(07-30-2012, 03:07 AM)
Eusis's Avatar

Originally Posted by nVidiot_Whore

People do change their mind on issues like this, and I think more people will see the support from Huckabee/Pailin/etc. as something that they want to stay away from.. it's going to rally a "base" but potentially turn some people off who are sitting on the fence.

Hopefully, IMO.

Yeah, if they were willing to at least cease or redirect their donations (IE to groups about helping people rather than those who want to actively fight gay rights) I could just ignore what the head honchos think because, well, they're free to think whatever they want even if it's stupid as hell. But now even if they DID redirect there'd be that stink of Huckabee and Palin supporting what they do and calling them a "great business" over it.

On a similar note, I have to admit this topic being kept around makes me hungry for fried chicken sandwichs even though I won't go to Chick-fil-a. Anyone else feel similarly? Maybe I will give the recipe for their chicken a shot, or just try more places locally to see who makes really good ones.
Kad5
Member
(07-30-2012, 04:25 AM)
Kad5's Avatar

Originally Posted by IrishNinja

congratulations, you read the first few chapters of Leviathan! keep reading, Hobbes makes some important points if ou continue.

Not to get off topic but I WILL say that a contract is not presumed valid unless all parties agree to it voluntarily, either tacitly or explicitly, without coercion.

So the "social contract" I live under is invalid in my eyes.
remnant
Banned
(07-30-2012, 04:48 AM)

Originally Posted by Devolution

Boycotts generate publicity. So do strikes. Publicity is the best kind of exposure to what certain companies are doing. These posts are hilarious.

All I've seen you guys do is put them in the news a lot.

Conservation with friend:

Me: Are you boycotting CFA
Friend: Who?
Me: The guys who sell chicken sandwiches on Day St
Friend: With the dancing cow
Me: Yeah that place.
Friend: Are they good.
Me: I heard they are the In-N-Out of chicken
Friend: Are you fucking serious? I'm checking them out

*Shrugs*
Link
The Autumn Wind
(07-30-2012, 04:51 AM)
Link's Avatar
Perhaps you should learn to get your point across better.
Eusis
Member
(07-30-2012, 04:54 AM)
Eusis's Avatar
Yeah, that's kind of the problem with drawing a lot of attention to them in this way, a lot of people who DIDN'T know or care about them will just to see what they make, political or social issues aside. Hell, if I hadn't already tried their chicken this probably would've made me at least curious to go for something cheap and basic, but I was sold on them back in the 90s when one of Imagine's magazine (PSM, PC Gamer, or PCXL) gushed about them, but haven't been able to go again until just a few years ago.

Originally Posted by Link

Perhaps you should learn to get your point across better.

Depending on the accuracy there it's just as much about not putting in enough information. I'd probably be just like his friend if a boycott was mentioned without a REASON for that boycott... followed by "the In-N-Out of Chicken". I'd think at worst it'd at least be one of the better fast food chicken sandwiches you could get.
Last edited by Eusis; 07-30-2012 at 04:58 AM.
Duane Cunningham
Member
(07-30-2012, 04:56 AM)
Duane Cunningham's Avatar
You know, KFC or some other chain should just go ahead and make some wink-wink promotion with a new sandwich called "everybody's sandwich" or something. Call it a celebration of diversity or whatever.


I think it would be a cynical, opportunistic cash grab, but hey, I think they're all assholes selling toxic crap anyway; one of them should jump on the opportunity.
Baconbitz
Banned
(07-30-2012, 04:58 AM)
Baconbitz's Avatar
Maybe I have the wrong pov. I support gays. I'm not gay but I support them. Here is the thing. I don't see not going to chic fila doing shit. I've worked for them in the past and still go there and everytime I pass one near me they are filled with people. If people stopped going there this would be a big news story. That's the thing. It's not.

Also, I'm really open to new oppions and thoughts. I have this feeling that my opinion is a wrong one.
philz
Member
(07-30-2012, 05:08 AM)
So I gotta give props to these guys for sticking with their beliefs (regardless of how bigoted they may be). No large corporation that has come out in favor of gay rights would have this degree of resolve. That said, chicken sandwiches should have absolutely nothing to do with sexuality (same can be said for Oreos), and if they want to press the issue, fuck them, I'll eat at Chipotle.
speculawyer
clairvoyancy is no excuse for trollin'
(07-30-2012, 05:10 AM)
speculawyer's Avatar

Originally Posted by EYEL1NER

Ugh. Just had someone on FB invite me to the whole Aug 1st 'Mike Huckabee Chik-Fil-A' event. I was really hoping I didn't know anyone like 'that.'

I guess Huckabee has given up on national politics. I guess he is a male version of Sarah Palin now.
antonz
Banned
(07-30-2012, 05:10 AM)
antonz's Avatar

Originally Posted by philz

So I gotta give props to these guys for sticking with their beliefs (regardless of how bigoted they may be). No large corporation that has come out in favor of gay rights would have this degree of resolve. That said, chicken sandwiches should have absolutely nothing to do with sexuality (same can be said for Oreos), and if they want to press the issue, fuck them, I'll eat at Chipotle.

I dont think its Chik Fil A really pressing anything. Their position has been known for a number of years now. If anything its people bringing the topic up to chik fil a then acting like it is a new position.
Link
The Autumn Wind
(07-30-2012, 05:11 AM)
Link's Avatar

Originally Posted by philz

So I gotta give props to these guys for sticking with their beliefs (regardless of how bigoted they may be). No large corporation that has come out in favor of gay rights would have this degree of resolve.

TheNatural
My Member!
(07-30-2012, 05:18 AM)
TheNatural's Avatar
My alma mater here is considering kicking them off campus. Hope it goes through, and hope it goes through at most Universities across the country.

University of Lousville's president and provost have decided not to eat at Chik-fil-A restaurants and called the company's statements opposing gay marriage "offensive and unnecessary."

The Lexington Herald-Leader reported the university has not made any decisions about an online petition to remove the restaurant from the university's Student Activities Center.

A statement sent Friday to the university's Office for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Services said university president Jim Ramsey and provost Shirley Willihngamz "will not be eating at Chick-fil-A anytime soon."

The statement said the university has been supportive of the LGBT community and they were in talks with the food vendor service to get information about the contract with Chick-fil-A.

U of L students are demanding, through a petition, the Chick-fil-A located in their student activity center be removed. Thus far, it has received more than 1,000 signatures.

Peggy Hay, the U of L student who started her campus' petition, told WHAS11 that her university does a good job of including and supporting all kinds of student groups, but allowing Chick-fil-A to remain in their student activity center would be "a slap in the face to one of those groups."

U of L is just one of many college campuses to disapprove of the Chick-fil-A president's political stance.

This week, Wichita State University and the University of Kansas also created petitions for the same cause.

A student group at the University of Texas Pan American in Edinburg is similarly demanding that their school cancel a contract to build a Chick-fil-A in their student union.

According to Change.org, students at the University of North Texas, the University of New Orleans, Mississippi State University, Gainesville State College, Indiana University (Bloomington Campus) and Texas Tech University have all released petitions to kick their respective Chick-fil-A's off campus.

Earlier this year, prior to Cathy's recent controversial interviews, a petition created by a freshman at New York University started a campaign against the only Manhattan location. To date, the petition to remove Chick-fil-A from NYU's campus has received over 10,000 signatures. NYU officials refused to close it.

Last edited by TheNatural; 07-30-2012 at 05:22 AM.
Dr. Malik
FlatAss_
(07-30-2012, 05:28 AM)
Dr. Malik's Avatar
I am kind of in a weird position. 3 of my siblings work for them, some of my friends work for them(including one of my lesbian friends who is a manager), and I used to work for them as well. I wasn't really bothered by this situation since I have known Chick-fil-A's stance on the matter for a while now but now I have seen them like pro Chick-fil-A propaganda and even one of them posted "I am proud to be a Chick-fil-A team member" which kind of felt like a slap in the face. Now I am beginning to question their position dealing with gay marriage, I was always thought it was pro since I am related to them and they being supportive so far.
smurfx
get some go again
(07-30-2012, 05:29 AM)
smurfx's Avatar
so when are the franchise owners going to sue corporate over this? sucks if you invested all that money into a franchise store and then this bomb drops.
Timedog
good credit (by proxy)
(07-30-2012, 05:31 AM)
Timedog's Avatar
Whether the boycott changes their bottom line is irrelevant. I don't want to give money that goes to support shutting down gay rights. If other people want to be assholes and give extra support to the company that counteracts the loss of support from people boycotting, they can be extra assholes, that's completely on them.

The question "how much effect is a boycott really going to have?", when used as a method to undermine the idea of a boycott, is meaningless.
metalslimer
Member
(07-30-2012, 05:35 AM)
metalslimer's Avatar

Originally Posted by smurfx

so when are the franchise owners going to sue corporate over this? sucks if you invested all that money into a franchise store and then this bomb drops.

What bomb? I don't see this affecting financials of the company at all really. Also I really do hate the thoughtline of this isn't going to work so why are you doing it. Of course I don't expect CFA to go bankrupt. That doesn't mean I will give money to them anyway to continue pulling their crap.

Edit: Beaten by timedog
antonz
Banned
(07-30-2012, 05:41 AM)
antonz's Avatar

Originally Posted by Marius_

I am kind of in a weird position. 3 of my siblings work for them, some of my friends work for them(including one of my lesbian friends who is a manager), and I used to work for them as well. I wasn't really bothered by this situation since I have known Chick-fil-A's stance on the matter for a while now but now I have seen them like pro Chick-fil-A propaganda and even one of them posted "I am proud to be a Chick-fil-A team member" which kind of felt like a slap in the face. Now I am beginning to question their position dealing with gay marriage, I was always thought it was pro since I am related to them and they being supportive so far.

I think for some marriage probably isnt something they are worried about so position doesnt matter. Others I am sure are just happy to have a job right now

Thread Tools