Muppets dump Chick-fil-a

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

So the VP of PR for Chick-fil-A dies of a heart attack.

http://www.towleroad.com/2012/07/don-pe ... ttack.html



Not the best timing really....

Well, despite action movie and Klingon bravado, there's never really a good time to die. That's unfortunate.

true...it is unfortunate and dying does suck. Still not the best time though really with all the attention on the firm.

[Gauthier]

If figures the Association of Creepy Lawyers and Utopians would come out from under their collective rocks and spew some nonsense about first amendment violations.

At least they're equal opportunity when it comes to defending free speech.

we know the old standbys you'd have for the ACLU if they had somehow taken the other side on the debate.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

So the VP of PR for Chick-fil-A dies of a heart attack.

http://www.towleroad.com/2012/07/don-pe ... ttack.html



Not the best timing really....

Hmm, He was in charge of PR for the entire company, PR VP's are usually seen as the 'company voice' and public company statements usually come from his office and if someone screws up, it's his office that gets to do 'damage control'. But what do you do when the one that signs your check and runs the company is the one that screwed up and said things that generated so much negative PR? Even if it is true, such statements shouldn't have been made in such a public forum.
You think the stress over how to 'fix' that mess is what caused the heartattack?

That or a possible bad diet...who knows. But you are right. Then again I wonder how Bill Gates feels about leaving MS to Steve Balmer and watch Balmer effectively ruinate the company he built...

[Greed and Death]

ACLU has come out in favor of Chik-fil-a, in regards to attempts by city alderman to block permits they need to open stores.

http://chicagoist.com/2012/07/27/aclu_t ... ivileg.php

As usual I applaud the ACLU for truly living up to the ever popular statement.
"I may disagree with you but I will fight to defend your right to say it."

[Saluterre]

ACLU has come out in favor of Chik-fil-a, in regards to attempts by city alderman to block permits they need to open stores.

http://chicagoist.com/2012/07/27/aclu_t ... ivileg.php

As usual I applaud the ACLU for truly living up to the ever popular statement.
"I may disagree with you but I will fight to defend your right to say it."

No one has attempted to limit Chick-fil-A's right to say those things. Chick-fil-A chose to use their freedom of speech to make bigoted comments. They have to deal with the consequences of their actions, just as they would if they had come out against interracial marriage.

[Farnhamia]

ACLU has come out in favor of Chik-fil-a, in regards to attempts by city alderman to block permits they need to open stores.

http://chicagoist.com/2012/07/27/aclu_t ... ivileg.php

As usual I applaud the ACLU for truly living up to the ever popular statement.
"I may disagree with you but I will fight to defend your right to say it."

No one has attempted to limit Chick-fil-A's right to say those things. Chick-fil-A chose to use their freedom of speech to make bigoted comments. They have to deal with the consequences of their actions, just as they would if they had come out against interracial marriage.

No, but a few elected officials have made statements suggesting they would be in favor of government action to make it difficult for Chik-Fil-A to conduct business. That's wrong and that's what the ACLU is talking about. I agree with them.

[Felthuzrotha]

Honestly, this whole issue is both saddening and yet hysterical to me. So a CEO says something related to politics? So what? We all have political positions, and yet the media and the mayors and whole hosts of people have gotten involved. Instead of the news talking about real issues like the national debt, or rising fuel prices, we get this minor crisis. We should be a nation that respects diverse opinions (including those against diversity), and we should draw a clear line between people who run businesses, and the business itself. Yet we get nothing but these petty issues that distract people and make them feel strongly because quite frankly, we live in an amoral and corrupt culture.

The whole point of this issue is basically a display for weak people if you ask me. We should not be so fierce about politics, but yet with the erosion of community structures, both religious and secular for the past fifty or so, we can find nothing but politics to define ourselves by. Instead of people showing respect, restraint, and an overall moderation (Indeed, a conservatism of demeanor), we see nothing but populist demagoguery over these issues. I think it is largely superficial people expressing themselves, be it insecure left wing narcissists, who hide moral defects and naivety or genuine non caring under a thin veil of "diversity" and "caring," or paranoid right wingers who are bigoted, and do not wish to exercise any real mental function, and instead pin all blames on "Mexicans," or "lefties."

This whole mini scandal to me just shows me volumes about what is wrong with America. Instead of churches, communities,civic groups, and families, people grow more introverted and corrupt, and can only define themselves by politics, because increasingly that is all America has left of any stronger bonds between people. Then this fuels this hate, and resentment on issues, instead of genuine debates on issues. Shame on all parties involved for degrading discourse in our nation to shit flinging "my ideology is better than yours" contests.

But then again, my two cents-tax=no sense, so I may be wrong.

[Raeyh]

ACLU has come out in favor of Chik-fil-a, in regards to attempts by city alderman to block permits they need to open stores.

http://chicagoist.com/2012/07/27/aclu_t ... ivileg.php

As usual I applaud the ACLU for truly living up to the ever popular statement.
"I may disagree with you but I will fight to defend your right to say it."

No one has attempted to limit Chick-fil-A's right to say those things. Chick-fil-A chose to use their freedom of speech to make bigoted comments. They have to deal with the consequences of their actions, just as they would if they had come out against interracial marriage.

If the KKK wanted to open up a chain of fast food restaurants, they would have every right to get building permits, too. I don't see what ideals have anything to do with this situation.

[Farnhamia]

Honestly, this whole issue is both saddening and yet hysterical to me. So a CEO says something related to politics? So what? We all have political positions, and yet the media and the mayors and whole hosts of people have gotten involved. Instead of the news talking about real issues like the national debt, or rising fuel prices, we get this minor crisis. We should be a nation that respects diverse opinions (including those against diversity), and we should draw a clear line between people who run businesses, and the business itself. Yet we get nothing but these petty issues that distract people and make them feel strongly because quite frankly, we live in an amoral and corrupt culture.

The whole point of this issue is basically a display for weak people if you ask me. We should not be so fierce about politics, but yet with the erosion of community structures, both religious and secular for the past fifty or so, we can find nothing but politics to define ourselves by. Instead of people showing respect, restraint, and an overall moderation (Indeed, a conservatism of demeanor), we see nothing but populist demagoguery over these issues. I think it is largely superficial people expressing themselves, be it insecure left wing narcissists, who hide moral defects and naivety or genuine non caring under a thin veil of "diversity" and "caring," or paranoid right wingers who are bigoted, and do not wish to exercise any real mental function, and instead pin all blames on "Mexicans," or "lefties."

This whole mini scandal to me just shows me volumes about what is wrong with America. Instead of churches, communities,civic groups, and families, people grow more introverted and corrupt, and can only define themselves by politics, because increasingly that is all America has left of any stronger bonds between people. Then this fuels this hate, and resentment on issues, instead of genuine debates on issues. Shame on all parties involved for degrading discourse in our nation to shit flinging "my ideology is better than yours" contests.

But then again, my two cents-tax=no sense, so I may be wrong.

If I disagree with what a business owner says publicly, I can express my opinion of him by not buying his products. Nothing wrong with that. The rest of your post is a just hipsterness. You're too cool for politics and the rest of us are introverted and corrupt. Uh huh.

[Socialdemokraterne]

I have two friends who work at other Chick-fil-A restaurants.

They too work or have worked with openly gay and lesbian employees.

I don't care. Supporting that franchise is supporting Dan Cathy and a company with a known history of supporting organizations associated with others such as Focus on the Family, and that is why I want nothing to do with it. I don't care if they did stop the donations. And since I don't actually have to justify my choices as a consumer to you or anyone else, that's really where it ends isn't it? I can be just as fickle and unreasonable as I want. They did something I don't like, I don't ever want anything to do with them again even if they did stop, that's it.

[Socialdemokraterne]

But then again, my two cents-tax=no sense, so I may be wrong.

The most important part of your entire tirade on the horrible evils of consumer activism. You are most assuredly wrong, and have misunderstood the relationship between vendor and consumer. I, as the consumer, have the money. They, as the vendor, must persuade me to purchase their wares. I am not obliged to give them my money, and the criteria upon which I judge whether I have been persuaded are entirely my own to set. I can decide to refuse custom based on rational things such as the cleanliness of the restaurant, or I can decide to refuse custom based on the sex of my attendant. Maybe I'll only buy chicken sandwiches from a male cashier. It's my prerogative as a consumer to be just as arbitrary as I wish since I have no obligation to the vendor whatsoever.

In this case, the president and CEO of the company has made a statement which has offended me, and the company over which he presides has a history of donating to organizations supportive of causes I oppose. I have, based upon these facts, decided to refuse custom. Explain my folly.

[Greed and Death]

No one has attempted to limit Chick-fil-A's right to say those things. Chick-fil-A chose to use their freedom of speech to make bigoted comments. They have to deal with the consequences of their actions, just as they would if they had come out against interracial marriage.

No, but a few elected officials have made statements suggesting they would be in favor of government action to make it difficult for Chik-Fil-A to conduct business. That's wrong and that's what the ACLU is talking about. I agree with them.

A Chicago Alderman has said he would deny a permit for the statements of the CEO, and Chik-fil-a's political donations.
Now I am sure counsel to the city of Chicago has told him that would be a bad idea. Even more so now the ACLU has shown up.

The alderman has since backed down and said a permit would be denied if those beliefs turned into actions that were discriminatory.

[Raeyh]

But then again, my two cents-tax=no sense, so I may be wrong.

The most important part of your entire tirade on the horrible evils of consumer activism.

It's really consumer slacktivism.

[Felthuzrotha]

But then again, my two cents-tax=no sense, so I may be wrong.

The most important part of your entire tirade on the horrible evils of consumer activism.

I am not saying I am for or against the issue of same sex marriage or anything of that nature. Not to mention consumer activism takes different forms. Refusing to by meat from a chain because of cruel factory farm practices is quite different than what is happening in this case. Here it is different, because a man is expressing a viewpoint. Of course it is your *right* to not buy from that chain. But rights have responsibilities. I understand completely if you want to disagree, or outright lambast the owner as a person, or as a political entity. But the relationships between businesses should be different. Why not just start opening chain stores for ________-ideologies only?

I just think it is rather ridiculous we politicize our shopping for such abstract political issues made by a person who owns the company. Labor abuse in central America is quite different than not supporting same sex marriage.

[Wikkiwallana]

At least they're equal opportunity when it comes to defending free speech.

This is true. This is the same ACLU that represented the Illinois Nazi Party when they tried to march in Skokie after all.

Yeah, everyone knows the proper way to deal with Illinois Nazis.

[Wikkiwallana]

I don't think "hey, they don't agree with me!" when i'm at Chick-fil-a.
I simply eat, because chicken is bad ass.

Eating bad ass?

Eating good ass is a waste of good ass.

[Socialdemokraterne]

The most important part of your entire tirade on the horrible evils of consumer activism.

I am not saying I am for or against the issue of same sex marriage or anything of that nature. Not to mention consumer activism takes different forms. Refusing to by meat from a chain because of cruel factory farm practices is quite different than what is happening in this case. Here it is different, because a man is expressing a viewpoint. Of course it is your *right* to not buy from that chain. But rights have responsibilities. I understand completely if you want to disagree, or outright lambast the owner as a person, or as a political entity. But the relationships between businesses should be different. Why not just start opening chain stores for ________-ideologies only?

I just think it is rather ridiculous we politicize our shopping for such abstract political issues made by a person who owns the company. Labor abuse in central America is quite different than not supporting same sex marriage.

As I said in my edit above, I'm allowed as a consumer to be as fickle and arbitrary in the criteria I use to determine whether or not a vendor should get my money as I choose, because I hold the money. It is not my obligation, my "responsibility", to separate the views of the person who presides as president and CEO of the vending franchise and my decision as to whether or not to provide my custom. I have no responsibilities at all in the consumer-vendor relationship. None whatsoever.

[Jari Head]

No one has attempted to limit Chick-fil-A's right to say those things. Chick-fil-A chose to use their freedom of speech to make bigoted comments. They have to deal with the consequences of their actions, just as they would if they had come out against interracial marriage.

If the KKK wanted to open up a chain of fast food restaurants, they would have every right to get building permits, too. I don't see what ideals have anything to do with this situation.

But they'd have as much chance of opening said chain as a Hasidic Jew opening a temple in Iran

[Raeyh]

If the KKK wanted to open up a chain of fast food restaurants, they would have every right to get building permits, too. I don't see what ideals have anything to do with this situation.

But they'd have as much chance of opening said chain as a Hasidic Jew opening a temple in Iran

But their success should be determined by the quality of their product and not the quality of their moral fiber.

As long as they aren't doing anything illegal, obviously.

[Mavorpen]

But they'd have as much chance of opening said chain as a Hasidic Jew opening a temple in Iran

But their success should be determined by the quality of their product and not the quality of their moral fiber.

As long as they aren't doing anything illegal, obviously.

No, that's wrong. They can have the best burgers ever, but the chances of them being successful because of how bigoted they are is slim. If they did become successful, it would be a new low in stupidity.

[Farnhamia]

But they'd have as much chance of opening said chain as a Hasidic Jew opening a temple in Iran

But their success should be determined by the quality of their product and not the quality of their moral fiber.

As long as they aren't doing anything illegal, obviously.

Tough, really. I can vote just as well with my wallet as I can at the ballot box. I don't like Don Cathy's politics, I'm not going to give him any money. Plain and simple, really.

[Raeyh]

But their success should be determined by the quality of their product and not the quality of their moral fiber.

As long as they aren't doing anything illegal, obviously.

No, that's wrong. They can have the best burgers ever, but the chances of them being successful because of how bigoted they are is slim. If they did become successful, it would be a new low in stupidity.

Yet you wouldn't do the opposite, would you? If the embodiment of goodness and humanity opened up a Burger Place that served the worst burgers known to man, you wouldn't buy them just to support the guy, would you?

Get realistic, most corporations are evil. Boycotting one for ethical reasons while turning a blind eye to all the crap the others pull is just being shortsighted.

[Farnhamia]

No, that's wrong. They can have the best burgers ever, but the chances of them being successful because of how bigoted they are is slim. If they did become successful, it would be a new low in stupidity.

Yet you wouldn't do the opposite, would you? If the embodiment of goodness and humanity opened up a Burger Place that served the worst burgers known to man, you wouldn't buy them just to support the guy, would you?

Get realistic, most corporations are evil. Boycotting one for ethical reasons while turning a blind eye to all the crap the others pull is just being shortsighted.

So what would you suggest?

[Mavorpen]

Yet you wouldn't do the opposite, would you? If the embodiment of goodness and humanity opened up a Burger Place that served the worst burgers known to man, you wouldn't buy them just to support the guy, would you?

No, because I'm a vegetarian.

Get realistic, most corporations are evil. Boycotting one for ethical reasons while turning a blind eye to all the crap the others pull is just being shortsighted.

I agree. How does this mean we can't boycott Chick-fil-a again? Oh that's right, it doesn't. It's you whining that many are hypocritical, something everyone already knows. How that means we shouldn't do the right thing is beyond me.

[Raeyh]

Yet you wouldn't do the opposite, would you? If the embodiment of goodness and humanity opened up a Burger Place that served the worst burgers known to man, you wouldn't buy them just to support the guy, would you?

Get realistic, most corporations are evil. Boycotting one for ethical reasons while turning a blind eye to all the crap the others pull is just being shortsighted.

So what would you suggest?

Either make a real difference in the world for those you care about or stop pretending that you are a positive force in life by not buying some fast food because a guy stuck his foot in his mouth.

No, because I'm a vegetarian.

He makes veggie burgers. One of the reasons they taste so bad.