Post # 1
- Wedding: August 2013 - Brookfield Zoo
Looks like they are changing their “company stance”. Apparently this just happened, and I just found out because my manager wants to go to Chick-fil-A for her birthday lunch (!?) so I googled their name. There were a few threads on Chick-fil-A’s dubious practices back when it was brought to light and became a big controversy (and I myself decided not to eat there anymore! until now?), so how do you feel about this? Do you think this makes up for the millions of dollars they gave previously? Will you eat there if you stopped before?
I don’t think this makes up for their past practices but I won’t feel bad about eating there now…
Post # 3
Nope. I think they are only stopping this since it all came out in the limelight. It’s like somebody who gets caught cheating saying I’m sorry. Most of the time they say sorry only because they were caught. It isn’t as if they came forth and admitted any wrong doing before being caught cheating, so often they aren’t truly sorry. Same with this situation. I will never eat there again.
Post # 4
@Jenn23: agreed. This is not being done because their hateful archaic views have changed, it’s because they got bad press. Screw them and anyone who supports them.
Post # 5
I’m conflicted, because I was a boycotter as well, but I think this was the best possible realistic outcome.
I don’t think they can come out and say they were wrong without offending the majority of their customer base (even though that’s ridiculous in and of itself) but they CAN stop giving money to those organizations.
Post # 6
Well, coming from the deep South, this is a bigger deal to people than it would be in most places. The two sides (Hating CFA, Loving CFA) are split down the middle.
I don’t eat there food often anyway, so it doesn’t matter to me.
(Also, I do believe them choosing not to donate to those organizations was because of the spotlight that has been shined on them recently, but I’m sincerely glad that they have stopped for whatever reason.)
Post # 7
Pffft. I’m glad that they’re no longer going to donate to organizations that actively work to oppress other people, but I’m sure it’s just for PR. I highly doubt their views have changed.
Post # 8
- Wedding: August 2013 - Brookfield Zoo
@Neetch: I do agree that this was the best realistic outcome. I didn’t have a problem with the fact that they are a Christian company with Christian views, I had a problem with the fact that any money I spent at the store had the potential to be donated to an organization I did not support in any way.
Mainly, I am glad I can join my team for my manager’s birthday lunch instead of being the debbie downer…………………………..
Post # 9
I’m torn. I did stop eating there, primarily because I didn’t want my money to filter its way through to orgs I don’t believe in. Now that my money wouldn’t be going to those orgs, it kinda takes my reasons for not eating there away. But it would still feel a little icky to me… so I dunno.
Post # 10
now i can eat it without shame anymore. (not that i eat there often, and i haven’t since the original story broke)
this whole thing made me so angry. not even really because they were donating money (but yes, that ticked me off), but because of all the crazy people that started flocking to chic fil a to express their hatred of gays.
i did NOT want to be associated with those unfortunate people.
but damnit, their chicken is good. and a chicken sandwich shouldn’t carry any political weight anyway!
Post # 11
I think I will eat there again, maybe. At least I won’t be actively boycotting them. I think it’s important to support businesses who “do the right thing,” so more companies have incentives to do so.
Post # 12
I didn’t eat there much anyway, so I didn’t necessarily stop after everything came to light. But I’m glad that they’re not giving money to those organizations anymore so I don’t feel guilty about eating there.
Post # 13
@Jenn23: Agreed. It’s only a publicity stunt. “Ohhh, we’re so sorry.”
Post # 14
I’m all for redemption and second chances. If we don’t reward doing the ” right thing” then it will not be an attractive option, and things will always be as they were. It’s quite hypocritical, since the whole message is about love, acceptance, etc but you wont forgive ..
Everyone has to work together to move forward and not be archaic and hateful- and that applies to both sides of the arugment!
Post # 15
You know, I’m glad this is the outcome because of the practical positive effect it will have (less money to hate groups).
BUT, it’s also very interesting that this “Christian” company was willing to sell out its “ethics” because sales were suffering. That’s about as anti-biblical as you can get. Very hypocritical. “We don’t like gays because the Bible says so, but we’ll ignore all the stuff about the spiritual trumping the material and being greedy versus doing what is good.”
Post # 16
I don’t eat fast food anyway, but I’m not sure if their change in stance is sincerely because they’ve changed their beliefs.