The tear down of the Burger King at 3707 North State Street has officially begun… in its place will be a Chick-Fil-A restaurant. People and even cities across America are boycotting Chick-Fil-A after President Dan Cathy stated that he believed “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation” when it comes to the discussion in our nation regarding what constitutes marriage. “We are very much supportive of the family – the biblical definition of the family,” Cathy said. “We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that.”
I can’t put that kinda “food” into my body to begin with!
“Will you boycott…” assumes I would eat at Chick-Fil-A. I looked up the eatery’s menu. Yuck. I don’t think I’d eat there regardless of the company’s politics.
The people that started this company are have run it very successfully are Evangelical Christians. They don’t open the restaurants and never have on Sunday. They are closed on Sunday because of their strict interpretation of the Bible that includes causing people to work on their sabbath.
So, is his point of view a surprise… really? I find it strange how intolerant people are that are -DEMANDING tolerance from everyone else. Eat there or don’t eat there but going out and being obnoxious when others have made a decision to eat there will not bring people to your side on anything. I believe in live and let live… but don’t push it
Those demanding tolerance from other but not from themselves, are irritating. I think they worship false gods; themselves.
If only the folks who shop their green little hearts out at Whole Foods knew the Libertarian beliefs of the CEO, upper State would have a whole less traffic. The fact is, corporate CEOs are to a person criminal reptilians, so singling out this dude because he disagrees with your one prize wedge issue just means you must agree with the other 99% of corporate leaders pillaging our Country for their own personal benefit.
Cherry-picking piety is equally annoying.
Chick-Fil-A’s chicken salad sandwich looks terrific. I will be the first in line because this classic is just not done well, if ever in this town. Yum. Welcome to Santa Barbara. Your menu looks like a winner.
Talk about cognitive dissonance. Can one enjoy the products of this food chain and not subscribe to the personal viewpoints of the owner? What really is at stake: protest against this man’s personal belief system or support for an individual to still hold a personal belief system that may run counter to other people’s personal belief system?
Everyone can vote with their own conscience. But that is as far as it should go and not demand everyone else is tarred when choosing to do otherwise. Live out your own beliefs; but do not invade or translate mine by default. My own personal belief system does not support totalitarianism and witch hunts, so know that when you see me eating a chicken salad sandwich at Chik-Fil-A.
If by boycott, you mean that I might prefer not to clog my arteries with fried chicken on white flour rolls with high sodium pickles, (possibly ensuring an earlier date with da Lord) then, yes, I will boycott. This family of billionaires (we must now include his two sons) have run a sterling business model; but when personal beliefs spill over into commercial enterprise, the customer, and only the customer, rules.
If I don’t like a company’s practices, I don’t shop there. I too wonder why people demanding tolerance are so intolerant of others? Rahm Emanuel denounced Chick Fil A coming to Chicago because of their stance on gay marriage, but welcomed a mosque because that’s viewed as an uber PC cool way to show tolerance. He should read Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi of the Islamic Society of North America, who said: “Homosexuality is a moral disorder. It is a moral disease, a sin and corruption. Homosexuality leads to the destruction of family life.”
A much harsher stance than the guy selling chicken sandwiches who favors traditional marriage. Just sayin’…
Unfortunately, many people still shop their despite the fact the profits go to protect interests they may object. Money speaks with far more volume then words. The point of all these protests isn’t about free speech or any of that, but the mere fact that a huge portion of their profits go directly to push gay marriage bans and other inequality legislation. Your sandwich there is pushing the anti-equality agenda with no disclosure.
Furthermore, this matter should have been resolved long ago. We live in a non-religious-based nation. Each of us is allowed to believe what they want, except for a few morally defined rules (killing, rape, suicide, etc). Opposing gay marriage can only be done from a religious standpoint, so any regualation on it is imposing religious views on population. Lastly, the term “traditional marriage” is so grossly inaccurate. From recordeed history to about the 5th century AD, women were property, not citizens, and “marriage” meant you sold your daughter to a man (and yes, that was called marriage, it’s were the term originates). From the 6th century to the 15th century, marriages meant bartering your daughter for land. From the 16th century to the 19th century, marriage had to approved and could still be forced on by the father of the women. Only until the early 20th century has women had equal status, and therefore equal say in “marriage”. To call a practice of 100 years “tradiational” is inaccurate.
I personally don’t care who marries who, but I often get tired of words and meanings I have known my entire life redefined to suit the needs of others. To me, marriage is a religious ceremony between and man and a woman. The state should not be involved other than to grant the rights of a civil union to the couple, regardless of gender.
If I was going to boycott Chick Fil A on moral grounds I would have to give up my Iphone and other Apple Products as well for their treatment of overseas labor, stop smoking pot because thousands are killed in the drug war and a whole lot of other reasons. Thats a slippery slope which would have me walking everywhere and living in a park no thanks.
That’s what they want from you,BTW..peasant serfs tending your organic gardens while they jet about in their private planes.
There is a difference between indifference to one mans opinion and financially supporting anti-gay legislation. It’s NOT one mans opinion that is the issue. It’s the systematic spending of company profits as a matter of company policy to strip/limit gay rights. Spending money at a place with these policy’s is like Casting your political vote against gay rights (like a campaign donation). Again. It’s the difference between reinforcing one mans opinion and reinforcing A companies concerted effort to limit gay rights. The CEOs opinion isn’t what upsets me, and wouldn’t stop me from eating at CFA but their spending of company profits to support anti-gay rights DOES. It’s important to know the difference. Look up how much CFA spends on stripping others of their rights! It’s sad. I will not spend one cent there.