Chick-Fil-A As A Case Study For Same-Sex Marriage As A Threat To Religious Freedom

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Now that is funny.

[wenglund]

No, the issue is the question in the OP: Chick-Fil-A As A Case Study For Same-Sex Marriage As A Threat To Religious Freedom. What does this case study teach us?

My answer is that so far, the case study suggests that complaints about same sex marriage threatening religious freedom are overblown.

Wrong. You are obviously very confused. The threats against religious freedom in the CFA case discussed in this thread, aren't from complaints about SSM, but from politicians illegitimately using their public offices against those opposing SSM. SMAC also mentioned other cases that pose similar threats.

Expressing his anti-same-sex-marriage views has resulted in lots of publicity and apparently a big increase in business. A couple of city-level officials have stated they won’t be friendly towards the company, but they are either backpedaling or facing legal challenges that they probably won’t win.

In aggregate, Chick-Fil-A expressed their views on this topic, and the result is that they are apparently making a lot more money.

Again, you are quite confused. CFA isn't making a lot more money for expressing their views, but as a result of social outcry against the presumed malfeasance in office by certain liberal politicians, and as a way of countering the boycott against CFA by proponents of so-called SSM.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Analytics]

Here is a case study for you. Why are they making a lot more money?

Because they are selling lots of food. Do you think that these guys making a lot of money over this are the victims of their religious freedom being curtailed?

How does supporting marriage between a man a woman make someone "anti"...would you describe God "anti". Although I admit he is anti-sin.

The "anti" side are the ones who want to deny the right of same-sex couples to get married. That is the anti side because they are the ones who are opposing same sex marriage. Have you read The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage? People who defend conservative values support gay marriage; that is clearly the positive side of the debate.

[The Nehor]

Here is a case study for you. Why are they making a lot more money?

Free advertising. I love Chik-Fil-A. I know this publicity made me eat more of it. Not because I particularly care about the viewpoint of their leaders or want to make a stand. It is because hearing the name makes me crave a delicious sandwich with pepperjack cheese, waffle fries, and a delicious chocolate shake. I hear the name more. I go there more. I was going to go again today but I decided to go somewhere else as the drive-thru line was going all the way to the street.

On a related note a gay friend of mine who opposes it was planning to join the boycott. I suggested an alternative. Declare a day of the week "Gay Chicken Day" and get the GLBT community out there. Dress stereotypically. This will drive away their opponents who don't want to see that and eventually Chik-Fil-A will become the "gayest place on earth". Gays get delicious chicken. Corporation has to reconsider offending this large market and make more money. Everyone wins.

[KevinG]

I have said it before but it is my understanding Chick-Fil-A has donated funds to organizations in order to defend their definition of marriage. As such, those that disagree with their definition of marriage can be boycotting not because of intolerance but in order to keep their own personal money from indirectly going to an organization they disagree with. Makes a lot of sense to me.

That CFR has yet to be answered. Show me the organizations that exist to defend Chick-fil-a definition of marriage (whatever that is). This whole bruhaha is over Dan Cathy's remark and the justifications were added later without documentation.

[The Nehor]

From the Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/wendys-wants-consumers-to-know-its-fine-with-gays,28985/

Wendy's Wants Consumers To Know It's Fine With Gays, Disapproves Of Interracial Marriage

DUBLIN, OH—Responding to Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy's recent controversial admission of the company's donations to antigay groups, a statement from competing fast food chain Wendy’s let consumers know Monday that it has long supported same-sex couples and only harbors strong objections to interracial marriage. "It's important that Wendy’s customers know our restaurant proudly stands by the right of all Americans to marry whomever they choose, so long as it isn't someone of a different race,” said spokeswoman Jenna Knox, adding that while Wendy’s has always backed pro-gay legislation, it found miscegenation "an abominable offense to God’s will." "Just like our founder Dave Thomas, we dream of living in an America where two loving people of the same sex can freely wed, provided of course that both people are also of the same race, and that no black, Asian, Latin American, or other non-European heritage is allowed to de-purify the white racial bloodline." Following the Wendy’s statement, executives from Jack in the Box confirmed that they too had always supported gay rights and the Holocaust never happened.

[Analytics]

Wrong. You are obviously very confused. The threats against religious freedom in the CFA case discussed in this thread, aren't from complaints about SSM, but from politicians illegitimately using their public offices against those opposing SSM. SMAC also mentioned other cases that pose similar threats.

As I said, the case study shows that a couple of city-level officials have stated they won’t be friendly towards the company, but they aren't getting much support and are either backpedaling or facing legal challenges that they probably won’t win.

The case study doesn't support the narrative that same-sex marriage is causing a significant and widespread damage to religious freedom.

Again, you are quite confused. CFA isn't making a lot more money for expressing their views, but as a result of social outcry against the presumed malfeasance in office by certain liberal politicians, and as a way of countering the boycott against CFA by proponents of so-called SSM.

....which all began by expressing them expressing views.

[bluebell]

Because they are selling lots of food. Do you think that these guys making a lot of money over this are the victims of their religious freedom being curtailed?

They are selling a lot of food though because people grew upset over the reaction of those who called for their boycott and otherwise wanted the company's figurative head. It's the reaction of most of the pro-ssm crowd that is causing CFA to make lots of money right now.

If there's any victim in this whole thing, it's many of the pro-ssm supporters who shot themselves in their foot by making sure that CFA has more money to donate to pro-traditional marriage causes than they otherwise would have.

[KevinG]

According to wikipedia (which I take with a grain of salt but this claim does have some references attached). I certainly wouldn't say its evil but I certainly don't expect supporters of gay marriage to be happy to see their money indirectly filtered to these organizations.

Go to the Chick-fil-a links I provided and see all of the organizations they donate to. It is much broader than those two and the bulk goes to adoption and education groups.

[bluebell]

The case study doesn't support the narrative that same-sex marriage is causing a significant and widespread damage to religious freedom.

Not for lack of trying. They just misjudged the reaction they would get.

Edited August 1, 2012 by bluebell

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

The "anti" side are the ones who want to deny the right of same-sex couples to get married.

So 99 percent of Mormons and our leadership are "anti"? Because I believe what God teaches...I hate. BTW most who practice a religion are the same haters. I have a gay child I guess I hate her?

[treehugger]

CFAs opposes ssm and CFA affiliates and supports groups which oppose ssm; this was known sometime last year. There was even a boycott last year, where was the support last year?

This is not an attack on religion or religious freedom, it is free market at its best, people are free to choose where they will spend their money.

Edited August 1, 2012 by treehugger

[KevinG]

Because they are selling lots of food. Do you think that these guys making a lot of money over this are the victims of their religious freedom being curtailed?

The "anti" side are the ones who want to deny the right of same-sex couples to get married. That is the anti side because they are the ones who are opposing same sex marriage. Have you read The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage? People who defend conservative values support gay marriage; that is clearly the positive side of the debate.

And yet conservative Christian politicians have not tried to bar anyone from opening a business in their town because the owners made a public statement about supporting same sex marriage. Go figure.

[KevinG]

CFAs opposes ssm and CFA affiliates and supports groups which oppose ssm; this was known sometime last year. There was even a boycott last year, where was the support last year?

This is not an attack on religion or religious freedom, it is free market at its best, people are free to choose where they will spend there money.

SSM and the political left had not ganged up to silence the personal opinions of a business owner by trying to boycott their business. That is what the support for CFA today. Get it - not anti-gay. Pro constitutional freedom of expression.

[KevinG]

More loving support for the rights of others:

http://journal-news....t.html?nav=5006

Did anyone catch this story on the bomb threat against a Chick-fil-a today? More leftist love and tolerance.

[Zakuska]

That is the best people have? So he gave money to people who gave money to other people and yet he is to blame for it? And even if it is so. So what, is this not America were we have a right to spend our money how we want? I will be going to Chick Fillet. Is that bad?

You Homophobe!

[treehugger]

SSM and the political left had not ganged up to silence the personal opinions of a business owner by trying to boycott their business. That is what the support for CFA today. Get it - not anti-gay. Pro constitutional freedom of expression.

And in the letter, spirit and purpose of Constitutional Rights you support the right of ssm advocates and others opposed (I personally do not like their food and i am opposed to the conveyor belt life and treatment of chickens) to CFA to call for boycotts, to have kiss-ins or to otherwise engage in free lawful expression that opposes CFA and the Cathys?

Edited August 1, 2012 by treehugger

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

CFAs opposes ssm and CFA affiliates and supports groups which oppose ssm; this was known sometime last year. There was even a boycott last year, where was the support last year?

This is not an attack on religion or religious freedom, it is free market at its best, people are free to choose where they will spend there money.

It is attack on people who dare make their religious beliefs known...call it what you will, this does not change the facts and the ability of those who are showing up in droves to buy their food. The error is people thinking the religious are stupid!

[wenglund]

The case study doesn't support the narrative that same-sex marriage is causing a significant and widespread damage to religious freedom.

The case study also doesn't support the so-called narrative that the moon is made of green cheese. In fact, it doesn't support the so-called narratives of countless other claims ranging across a broad spectrum of issues that have absolutely no relevance to what the case was actually about--including the utter inanity of you point, which ought to have gone without saying.

Feel free to chime in when you have any other jaw-droppingly vacuous comments to make, not that you need an invitation. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Zakuska]

Did anyone catch this story on the bomb threat against a Chick-fil-a today? More leftist love and tolerance.

Well you know Kevin... it probably is a Hetro-Religious-White-Man who is trying to make the LGBT look bad.

[treehugger]

Did anyone catch this story on the bomb threat against a Chick-fil-a today? More leftist love and tolerance.

Was the person who made the threat identified? Or are you just looking for easy scapegoats?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Did anyone catch this story on the bomb threat against a Chick-fil-a today? More leftist love and tolerance.

Typical...

[Zakuska]

From the Onion:

http://www.theonion....ith-gays,28985/

Wendy's Wants Consumers To Know It's Fine With Gays, Disapproves Of Interracial Marriage

DUBLIN, OH—Responding to Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy's recent controversial admission of the company's donations to antigay groups, a statement from competing fast food chain Wendy’s let consumers know Monday that it has long supported same-sex couples and only harbors strong objections to interracial marriage. "It's important that Wendy’s customers know our restaurant proudly stands by the right of all Americans to marry whomever they choose, so long as it isn't someone of a different race,” said spokeswoman Jenna Knox, adding that while Wendy’s has always backed pro-gay legislation, it found miscegenation "an abominable offense to God’s will." "Just like our founder Dave Thomas, we dream of living in an America where two loving people of the same sex can freely wed, provided of course that both people are also of the same race, and that no black, Asian, Latin American, or other non-European heritage is allowed to de-purify the white racial bloodline." Following the Wendy’s statement, executives from Jack in the Box confirmed that they too had always supported gay rights and the Holocaust never happened.

Wendy... a Skin Head?! Who would have thunk it?! Edited August 2, 2012 by Zakuska

[wenglund]

CFAs opposes ssm and CFA affiliates and supports groups which oppose ssm; this was known sometime last year. There was even a boycott last year, where was the support last year?

This is not an attack on religion or religious freedom, it is free market at its best, people are free to choose where they will spend there money.

Since when does it somehow become "free market at its best" for public officials to deny business licenses and the sort based on opposing political views?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 1, 2012 by wenglund

[Analytics]

The case study also doesn't support the so-called narrative that the moon is made of green cheese. In fact, it doesn't support the so-called narratives of countless other claims ranging across a broad spectrum of issues that have absolutely no relevance to what the case was actually about--including the utter inanity of you point, which ought to have gone without saying.

Feel free to chime in when you have any other jaw-droppingly vacuous comments to make, not that you need an invitation. LOL

The blog quoted in the OP summarized its position thusly:

"Same-sex marriage combined with nondiscrimination policies will result in significant discrimination against individuals and institutions that hold to the belief that marriage is—and should be defined in law as—the union of one man and one woman."

I was directly addressing that assertion in the context of whether Chik-Fil-A is a case study that supports it. If you think my position on that is "utter inanity," then I'm glad you agree with me about the actual topic of the OP.