Chick - Fil-A BoycottFollow

Chick-Fil-A doesn't exist here in western Michigan. (at least not in my town or any town within decent travel distance)

I did visit them a few years ago when I was in Myrtle Beach. The lady at the hotel desk said I had to go, it was the greatest thing ever. I was very disappointed. It's a highly overrated chain.

I'll take KFC over Chick-Fil-A any day. (Hey, that rhymes!)

It's going so well I've retroactively boycotted them for several years.

We're half boycotting it.

We will eat there when there is no monetary gain for the company. I already have a cow calendar laden with free food from last Christmas (not buying another one) and it would be a shame to let CFA get away with not giving me my free food. Also, the Red Cross gives away CFA coupons when we give blood, that are BOGO, and since the markup on most restaurant food is around 50% (if not less), we're not actually giving them any profits when we buy two chicken sandwiches for the price of one.

It's a shame, they tend to be some of the nicest, cleanest restaurants around. I've eaten at the original Dwarf House in Hapeville near the ATL airport. And their grilled sandwiches were one of the few really healthy options from fast food I liked.

CFA won't go out of business due to the boycott, but they're going to have a harder time expanding into new markets.

I wanted to post this. :(

You know, my Grandmother boycotted Pepsi because they removed "Under God" from their Pledge of Allegiance limited time cans. Which Pepsi never made. She's quick to jump on the "Boycott everything that goes against Christianity" bandwagon without even checking to make sure it's true.

I've heard this same line over and over today.

The right to free speech simply grants one the freedom from government sanction or infringement. It doesn't mean one can say what they please without consequence. The CEO saying what he did was merely a catalyst for the entire fiasco. It's now public that Chik-fil-a has donated millions to organizations who's sole purpose in existing is to pursue the inequality of an American minority. Free speech is not the issue nor is anyone impugning on his rather than exercising their own.

Edited, Aug 2nd 2012 3:09am by Kaain

Huh. I haven't heard peep about that from anyone unless they were already predisposed to ***** about him, typically because he's a Democrat. I guess we talk to different "many"s. Emanuel will be mayor for as long as he wants the job anyway just like Daley was; he has the correct mix of traits to get elected time and time again.

Anyway, it's good to know that the culture wars are alive and well.

Edited, Aug 2nd 2012 8:01am by Jophiel

Are you pro-choice or anti-life? Pro-life or anti-abortion? That's the same amount of difference as your argument.

At least one of the organizations receiving funds from CFA/WinShape is Exodus International, which advocates becoming "ex-gay" through pray-away-the-gay reparative therapy. Pretty sure that claiming to stop gayness is anti-gay. Maybe you have a different definition.

Edit to clarify other stances.

Edited, Aug 2nd 2012 9:38am by LockeColeMA

Before this turns into a tedious 100 page gay marriage slog with Alma, I got bored and played with some numbers regarding Chicago.

Chicago has 2.7 million people in its actual city limits; i.e. people who can potentially vote for mayor in the city. The average Republican vote during the 2000 and 2004 elections in Chicago was 35%. I left out the 2008 election because I figured Obama coming from Chicago would bias the results. 35% of 2.7 million is 945,000 people. That's more than enough people to make a noise on Facebook or fill a couple talk radio stations with complaints or tell Alwayslost that Mayor Emanuel is a doody-head. Hell, 945,000 people would make the 11th largest city in the US if they ever decided to form their own enclave somewhere.

I have no idea how many people showed up at the existing CFA in Chicago. Let's call it 500 people. That's 0.05% of the Republicans in the city of Chicago. It's still 500 people; it's not as though I could get 500 people to meet in one place in the city, but it's an insignificant number when discussing city politics. 1,000 people (0.1%) would be insignificant. Especially since I suspect most of those people are already predisposed to vote for a Republican anyway.

But here's the thing... it still doesn't matter. Chicago hasn't had a Republican mayor since 1931. In the last election, there wasn't even a Republican on the ballot (it was a "non-partisan" ballot but everyone on it was a Democrat). And Emanuel, against five opponents, still swept 55% of the vote and avoided a runoff.

The CFA pictures make good "news" in that people like reading about it. They give some people cause to gloat. They're also completely irrelevant as far as Chicago politics go. Anyone grumbling that Emanuel doesn't know Chicago values or whatever is kidding themselves if they think anyone else gives a sh*t. Maybe somewhere else it might matter, I'm just talking Chicago since its at the epicenter of this "controversy".

With all that said, I believe Emanuel was wrong to say it or to threaten to use his powers in that fashion (despite it being a pretty impotent threat given how quickly a lawsuit would fall against him). But the "protests" don't mean anything from a city politics perspective.

[Edit: I realize that not all of of that 2.7mil is eligible to vote for whatever reason but this isn't hard science either so I'm not sweating the details. The percentages would remain largely the same.]

Edited, Aug 2nd 2012 9:19am by Jophiel

Maybe you're just ****-racist!

I just looked and apparently "gaycist" is a word. I mean, it's a word in the same sense that "sexting" is a word in that people say it even if it makes the dictionary cry in pain.

Edited, Aug 2nd 2012 9:26am by Jophiel

Also, this

What the **** is Chick-Fil-A?


....no seriously, what is it? I've never heard of it before