I guess it was too hot outside for gay rights protesters? PETA seemed able enough to protest though. I guess animal rights are more important than gay rights? The apathy is disappointing.
I guess it was too hot outside for gay rights protesters? PETA seemed able enough to protest though. I guess animal rights are more important than gay rights? The apathy is disappointing.
-Said no one ever.Demosthenes11 is hilarious
I feel like this issue is made out to be much bigger than it really is.
I can certainly understand the concern/frustration, but at the end of the day I can't reason myself into believing that continuing to buy chick-fil-a food (even as a supporter of gay rights and/or being against their associations) is a major issue or even all that hypocritical.
When it comes down to it, eating there once a week for an entire year is equivalent to what... giving $5 to a hate group? And that $5 dramatically outweighs everything else that person may do? There are far bigger, more important and difference-making issues here with gay rights. I'd even wager that someone merely voicing support for gay marriage/rights, and nothing else, does far more towards the cause than buying Chick-fil-a for breakfast/lunch/dinner every day of your life does against it.
I think we need restaurants to display who they donate to, so can better spend our money and not have it go to hate groups, religious organizations or political parties we don't agree with.
I may never be serious but I am mentally capable of having an intelligent discussion.
This point is obviously brought up in reference to the fact that Tweek would be out of his league in K-12
Yeah, but a lot of those people are just assholes, or are in no way affiliated with my chik fil a. Damnit, why can't you people just keep your hands off my fucking burgers. How about you tell chik fil a to stop donating money to those organizations, instead of trying to berate people like me for wanting awesome (tasting) food.
This argument is so stupid. Everybody in here has knowingly funded and endorsed either genocide, terrorism, oppression, famine, or lack of human rights.
Anti-gay organizations though? Nah son, that's where some of you draw the line and make a stand apparently.
Do i really have to tell you that nobody is up in arms because they think chickfila is personally whispering suicide in every gay kid's ear? I am going to assume you were being facetious. Would you like to be the first to get upset, or were you just bringing this up for a different reason?
Let me ask you this, do you think chik fil a can change their bigoted ways?
So what do we do about the inevitable job losses that would occur if people stopped eating at chik-fil-a? Is it just tough luck that they happen to have a job at chik-fil-a, and it's all they can find in this economy?
I think you're hurting the average person who is just trying to make rent, keep food on the table, etc far, far more than you could ever hurt the company itself, or the beliefs of the CEO, if you truly wish people would stop eating at chik-fil-a in support of gay rights. At the end of the day, I'm sure the guy will continue donating to the cause he personally believes in with or without his company. I imagine he won't go broke if his company went out of business.
I think the likeliest outcome of people boycotting the local fast food restaurant is the closure of the business, putting dozens of people out of work.
I know this is a thread about LBGT rights and such and I really do support it and don't plan on eating at chik-fil-a (the food there makes me ill, actually), but I can't help but wonder if there's a different way to approach the situation that won't potentially cost people jobs. I don't know what that way would be, personally.
I think we're talking more on a scale of $.05, if that.When it comes down to it, eating there once a week for an entire year is equivalent to what... giving $5 to a hate group?
In the end, it's pretty simple: pragmatic people vastly outnumber principled people and society encourages the former.
Most people have values and principles, but won't follow through on them if it means any kind of inconvenience or privation. And once again, our societies strongly encourage such behaviour.
Personally, I wouldn't go to that fast food chain anymore (if it existed here)... on my own.
But in a group of friends, I'd probably be forced to give in to peer pressure, so as not to be "that anal-retentive guy who cares about trivial shit" or something to that effect.
The market doesn't disappear, it's just redistributed to other existing chains or new ones; so the jobs would mostly be redistributed, not lost. Major incovenience for the workers, admittedly, but they should be able to find a new job in a relatively short period.So what do we do about the inevitable job losses that would occur if people stopped eating at chik-fil-a? Is it just tough luck that they happen to have a job at chik-fil-a, and it's all they can find in this economy?
No?This argument is so stupid. Everybody in here has knowingly funded and endorsed either genocide, terrorism, oppression, famine, or lack of human rights.