Thursday, August 2, 2012

Chicken Vs. Not Chicken

I feel the need to weigh in on the Chik-Fil-A issue.

First of all, this isn't about the first amendment, like people seem to think it is.It's not about a man who owns a company who has a viewpoint supporting traditional marriage. Good for him. He's allowed to think and do whatever he wants within the law, and like it or not, his opinion is just as valid as mine.

It's about boycotting a COMPANY that funnels money into anti-gay organizations. Organizations that treat gays as less-than-human. Organizations that discriminate and shame gays. A COMPANY, PEOPLE. This guy isn't using private funds for this. He's using COMPANY FUNDS for this.

So if you don't support the company, don't go get delicious chicken.

What am I doing? Not going to Chik-Fil-A. But I'm not making Scott boycott with me. He doesn't give half a damn about politics as I do, and he loves their chicken. And who could blame him? It's damn delicious.

The end. That's all there is to it.


(My sister is gay, I have friends and friends of friends and family members of friends who are gay, and guess what? They're awesome people who have rights, and who should get more rights, like "regular" people.)


kim said...

It has nothing to do with the First Amendment. People who claim that it does need a serious lesson in what the First Amendment truly protects. This ain't it.

I don't have to worry too much about the practical consequences of taking a stance on this issue. Obviously I think any company that spends money on that shit is useless...but so many companies do. I try to concentrate my company boycotts as much as possible. I avoid Walmart like the plague. But I know that other corporations have issues, I just can't keep up with everything and still remain sane.

In all honesty, the crazy people are the conservatives who have gone to bat for Chick-fil-a as if someone offended their own child.

Kwiddens said...

I've refrained from commenting on this for quite a while.
First, I'd like to say that all this man said was that he believes in marriage as stated in the bible. He wasn't hateful or spiteful about it. He's not spewing poison.
Second, how is this not about the first amendment? This man stated what his beliefs are and because of that, at least 3 mayors have said that they aren't going to allow Chik-Fil-A in thier cities. The first amendment absolutely protects him from things like that.
As far as his putting money toward foundations that are against homosexuals, well, I hadn't heard that. But that's his perogative. It's his company, it's his money. It's not as if he's not paying taxes or not paying his employees and then giving that money to these foundations.
I'm as sick as anybody else is of hearing about Chik-fil-a. But I differ in my opinion on it.