This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

This is something my cousin posted on her facebook. I'm not, in this instance, angry because of the whole Chick-Fil-A opposing gay marriage, but the overall message of the sign. I know that "Family Values" are often interchangeable with Christian values, but if you're going to say "Family Values" it should be that you mean families in general, otherwise you should say what you mean, "Christian and Conservative values."

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I agree, I think the American public, at least, has been exposed to this so long that now we hear the word "family" in the title of a company, or "family values" in a sentence, and we know we're about to hear some anti-gay stuff. I wish they would stop using that phrase and just say 50's white America upper lower middle class values, because that's what the overall ideal world seems to be for them.

"Family values" means getting your kids a good education, teaching them life lessons, and helping them get on their feet as adults. It has nothing to do with LGBT rights (as far as legal marriage, adoption, tax statuses, etc goes) and I get annoyed that the social conservative movement has been using it differently.

For a minor aside on the CFA business, Chick-Fil-A has the right to say whatever they want about gays, and we have the right to drive their business into the ground through boycotting and bad press. (Free speech and economic freedom and all that) The CEO should have asked his PR guy about this first, now CFA reaps the rewards. It's all on him.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I'm surprised that FF's Pub hasn't posted an article about the whole Chick Fil-A incident to be quite honest.
While Chick Fil-A makes some damn good chicken, they've always struck me as somewhat devout Christian people, especially given that they're closed on Sundays and operate in predominantly southern/Anti-LGBT areas such as Mississippi. Still, gotta feel bad for all of those indifferent employees working at Chick-Fil-A who are just trying to make an honest buck.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Well, to be honest, there's not a whole lot you can say. As far as I (and most of us) know, they are perfectly within their rights to hold that opinion, not to mention closing on Sundays. I mean, it's not like they're refusing sales to gay people.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I think its a little cold hearted of the company to do, but its not like im not going to buy there fries because of it. (im vegetarian) Although I am christian, I have to disagree with them, probably 6/10 of my friends are gay, or lesbian. (art school) I havent seen an instance in the bible oppressing gays, and even if there is, its a book. I mean, I believe there is a God, or some almighty force to create a univers, but thats so reason to freak out and follow every word of the bible. Its been rewritten and translated a million times, and it might not even be real! I think the human mind just cant compromise some things , so we end up with these lunatics who make other christians look bad. Our local paster always says, "Dont be weird people, that doesnt make people want to join your religion"

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Well, that's one way to look at it =p

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I can only think of bigotry as the only reason to these things... There's no political, economical or intelligent reason to be a gay-hater or whatever those call themselves.

Myself, I'm pretty conservative. I like cultures and languages and like to keep them clean, free from other thoughts and so on, but that only applies me. I won't force anyone to change the way they view culture and language because I dislike it. Same applies to many people I know, and this is what these overly conservative bigots fail to see, and on the road, they give a bad name to christians (as an exmaple), exactly the way BinaryMouse put it.

Hell, I'm writting pretty much out of anger right now too.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Here's my take on the sign, To me 'family values' declares marriage between man and woman with kids.

While I believe family values and Christian values are different, they can follow similar paths at times. I know atheist families that don't support gay marriage.

Because of the owner being Christian and the sign is support of him...I can understand the confusion.


Side note: I think this whole thing got blown way of out control...everyone has a right to their opinion.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

So how do family values differ from Christian values, and how do conservative Christians manage to reconcile these differences?

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I see it this way (I might be wrong): family values are specific to the family in question, while christian (family) values are specific to christian people, or simply any family who wants to take the christian way as values in their family.

For example, my brother has two kids and wife, and he's not christian, but he does teach his children values, most of which are things like freedom of choice and thought, not to discriminate, not to be stupid, common sense and basic things like that, none of them based on religion, but more on how he has seen works good for them and what will give their children the necesary knowledge and morals to "behave well" in life, and nothing with christianity or anything.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Are you sure you're [still?] a Christian?

Christianity has a few very specific goals. I don't care what denomination you are a part of, what doctrines you hold to, or how accurate you believe the bible to be, Christianity and LGBTQ do not mix.

The Bible and homosexuality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are enough passages, and many of the passages are detailed enough to make it difficult to believe that all were mistranslated. The Bible is very clear on its stance that sexuality is a choice, and not a biological issue.

Taken as a whole, the Bible does not codone oppression against non-Christian or non-Jewish LGBTQ individuals. The laws and rules are to be applied internally, and must be upheld by all believers.

However, the Bible is clear that LGBTQ is confusion, and does not fit in with the portrait of a perfect human being. It is not like a favorite color choice, which can vary, hetrosexuality is a requirement.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

The problem is not so much their right to their "opinion". As much one may disagree with it, they are free to believe what they want.

The problem has been coming in whether or not this affects their hiring policies and whether or not they've been donating to certain groups that might otherwise be considered as "hate groups". This has been a common charge against Chick-fil-a for a long time. That goes beyond merely having an opinion and "moral" choice, and affecting action that might be harming other people.

I'm not sure what can be done about that though. I mean even one calls for a boycott of Chick-fil-a, how effective would it be? Much of the chain has profitable activities across the South, and I know of three pretty close to where I am. Can't see it working, so on the flipside this call to "support" Chick-fil-a (didn't Santorum and Huckabee jump on that too?) is rather amusing. I mean every day I drive by one around lunch and it's always packed, compared to the poor Whataburger which is not so much. I don't think any of this is hurting them economically.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Well, you've got another group that is voting for their decision with their wallets, offsetting any lost customers.

I would be doubtful if this has affected the business at all.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

The thing is though I don't think there has been necessarily any sign of damage to Chick-fil-a that necessitates a big sign of support- this isn't the first time the accusation has been leveled against Chick-fil-a, it's only the first time Chick-fil-a management has said "well yeah we're against gay marriage". It's not like their stock prices suddenly collapsed and their franchises shuttered from this "pressure" from the all powerful "gay agenda".

The idea that Chick-fil-a is being "bullied" and hurt because of this baffles me though. Who is really being "bullied" here right now- the people Chick-fil-a is potentially discriminating against in hiring, or the criticisms leveled against it on the internet?

Then again there's always this talk about the "gay agenda" that presumably has so much power, so I guess it fits into that political stuff right now, hence Santorum and Huckabee, among others, getting behind this. Of course also to get some political relevance again.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

That's just stupid for a restaurant to take part in politics. Bad marketing, likely their brand suffers a bit but yeah, not likely that it's significant anyway.

But no reason to make a fuss either. The thing with same-sex marriage is that the best argument for it is that it's a social construction. But also the best argument against it is the same. I do support same sex-marriage, but I don't support polygamy. That could also be rationally supported, saying that they are consenting adults and who are we to judge.

So essentially their opinion against it is as valid too. It only turns into a problem if married people have some benefits which a gay couple doesn't. Like tax benefits, apartment benefits, things dependant on legislation and whatever there could be. Notice that these things relate to public law and the government, which makes it a secular political issue, not a religious one. So then it becomes discrimination because of those things and thus supporting same-sex marriage is a good thing.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Here an example: two families,one with family values one with Christian values.


Family values: Father, mother and son pull up to a store in a car, as they get a out a stranger pushes the son. This make the father mad. The father then pushes the stranger and says if he does that again he will kill the stranger.

This is strong family values to protect the family

Christian values: Father, mother and son pull up to a store in a car, as they get a out a stranger pushes the son. Father comes around., "Sir, he did nothing to you to deserve you pushing him around. If you continue, I'll be forced to call the police"

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Lol, yeah, because only a Christian father would react in a such a way.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

The right wing will buy what? Three or four chicken sandwiches a piece? But if they don't like chicken sandwiches they're not going to go in there every day for years. It's something you have to make an effort to do. Whereas boycotting a place is virtually no effort at all - and in any case the cause will be felt by those its harmed for longer.

As long as they made tasty chicken, right and left would have shopped there. It may well be the case that the conservatives who shop there in the short term will offset the costs of gays and their supporters boycotting them. But someone's liable to have a much longer memory for the harm you do them than they are for some minor help you do some abstract cause they barely see. Harm is always something personal.

Companies taking a political position like this is incredibly stupid.

Sure, and my opinion is people who hold the view that gays shouldn't be able to get married are arseholes. Just because you've a right to it doesn't mean I have to like it.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Why am I always getting the impression that people who hate religion are more outraged by these types of things than the people who are actually effected by them?

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I'd imagine people who get continually shafted (no pun intended) have to get somewhat numb to it, otherwise the psychological costs would probably be quite large.

Or maybe you're just projecting.

Or maybe the reasons for hatred are the same as the reasons for dislike of the mistreatment, and so the two stack.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I think people who hate religion probably do have a tendency to be outraged by outrageously stupid things. It's just a feeling I have.

Though I admit, this is the first I've heard about this Chick-fil-A business. I guess I'll go and ask some gay Americans how they feel about being discriminated against before I make up my mind.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I didn't say that and don't put words in my mouth. I was asked to give an example and I gave ONE. I never said it was the normal.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

I know you didn't, but you seem to be heavily implying that Christians, because of their beliefs, are generally good-natured compared to those without Christian/Religious beliefs.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

The Christian sounded like a bit of a pussy to me. >_> Just saying. You go up to someone who's just assaulted your son and wave your other cheek in his face he's liable to give you a smacking.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

Violence begets violence. Somebody has to break the chain. The Christian did not sound weak to me.

Besides, which is a clearer demonstration of strength, and control? Getting mad and fighting back, or withstanding the blows. What would Superman do?

Also, if you don't throw a punch, you can't be blamed. This makes it clear that you were the victim. Makes things easier in court.

Well, that is what Christians are brought up to expect, even though the Bible clearly teaches the opposite. It is the goal, not the reality.

Re: This made me quite angry
 

If they're not careful, they're going to find it being broken over their head.

Violence, in the context of conversation, is another bargaining chip. One that the cops are liable to use at least the implication of when they turn up too.

It will not accomplish long-term reform - at least not without using huge amounts. Coercive models of justice do not work well. However, it will allow you to control someone who you would otherwise be unable to as long as the immediate threat of violence is present. Both in the lead up to a situation, he may never go there if he knows you'll go there too, and in the situation itself.

He gave an ineffectual threat - which may well be taken as a challenge. Do it again and I'll call the police. Oh yeah? Fuck you motherfucker. No, I'm sure the guy's real scared now. The police that might turn up in twenty minutes and aren't even on their way.

If the case ever goes to court, which it probably won't, he says you attacked him and you say he attacked you. Chances are the police won't even look for him very hard. And if he's the sort of arsehole he sounds like, he's going to know that.

If you're going to talk to an angry person open with a question. It helps to interrupt the style of thought that keeps someone attacking. They've got to think about their answer. Fixes their attention on you. Don't tell them to calm down or ask them what their problem is, that'll just set them off more. Ask if they're okay.

Stand slightly side on to him so he has to move to attack you in the first place - makes the hands look more natural too....

Have your hands out placatingly (subtly - don't have them stretched out at full extension in front of your or anything. Hang them naturally off the end of your arms) so they can't sucker punch you - also looks good if it's on the CC, since everyone can visibly SEE that you weren't just going up to him to insult him. Establishes a physical barrier to keep him at a safe distance so he can't get up in your face.... And people gesture lightly with their hands all the time when they speak.

Son ought to be getting back in your car while this is going on.

You can't just rock up to someone and be all like 'You shouldn't be doing that, stop it or I'll call the police.' If they back down, they'll look weak. You need to recognise that a dominance contest is going on and get ahead of that.

I'm not pretty enough to get my face smashed in just for the moral high ground in court. Some of us have to preserve what little good looks we have. ;)

Re: This made me quite angry
 

It will be interesting to see where the United States goes with hiring laws in the future. Technically speaking, there is nothing in federal current code that bans discrimination based on sexual orientation (as a reminder, it currently covers "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin", with amendments for disabilities, age, military history). It has been up to states and localities to add such provisions, and attempts to do so nationally have gotten no traction. The states that have such provisions on the ground for discrimination based on sexual orientation are "California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin" as well as Washington D.C., and some local authorities. Beyond that it'll be up to the corporation or place of business to make a stand against it.

Of course no one's yet to prove that there's an unspoken hiring policy with regards to homosexuals at Chic-fil-a, but it's a safe bet to say that a manager is not punished if he does fire someone for it.

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

Seems "Appreciation Day" called by social conservatives here worked wonders for Chick-fil-a:

Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day draws crowds, company gratitude - latimes.com

I saw that the one near where I live was fairly packed too. I guess they really came out to show that they can't be bullied by insidious "gay agenda".

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

So that it what that image was about. I didn't even see the date at the bottom until now.

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

And the gays are going to come in on Friday? Wow Chick-fil-a is getting alot of business this week.(I bet they won't be allowed in unless they buy food).

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

Am I the only one that experiences strange thoughts when hearing the name "chicken filler" err... "chick fill-a"? =p

Why would a company openly support a political agenda (with the exception of arms manufacturers etc. supporting taking up arms...)? I certainly wouldn't visit a business more often because they share my ideals, and if they oppose my values I may or may not frequent them less often. The primairy reason would be price versus quality and service though... So what is their goal? I it an attempt to discourage homosexuals from seeking employement there? Could they decline people because of their sexual orienation??

In the Netherlands certainly not, since article 1 of the constitution says that "All who remain in the Netherlands, willl be treated equal in all instances. Discrimination on grounds of religion, beliefs, political views, race, gender or any other base is not allowed.". Though ofcourse there is a workaround: declining a job because you "don't fit in with the companies workingculture"

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

*Officially* the position they have on gay marriage is only a corporate one and not a matter of hiring. There's also the matter as to whether the profits of CFA are used to help support various anti-gay marriage outfits. The accusation has been there, but it has yet to be proven as such. As it stands the issue here is more of A. Whether a business should take an opinion like this and B. Gay marriage in general. There's also a broader discussion which you mentioned too as to the role of a business and whether or not they are entitled to the the same individual rights of "Freedom of Speech" here.

As to why CFA does this, it's a combination of the founder and owners' own opinions as well as a good business image. Many CFA's are down here in the South and people are generally supportive of those places that declare themselves to be guided by Christian principles. Chick-fil-a is not the only one that does this- around here there are several small stores that also sometimes proudly declare that they are "Christian-owned", which seems to have become synonymous with the family-owned small business mentality here.

For a fast-food chain like Chick-fil-a, it helps to try and differentiate themselves from what is usually considered to be a very "big business" atmosphere. At least where I am, the main American casual fast food chains are McDonalds, Wendy's, and to a lesser extent Burger King and Whataburger. To top that off CFA is usually bigger on franchising, so as to continue the appeal of a 'locally-owned' shop that is inline with "Christian principles"- presumably the same of its population.

This Christian-based principle of CFA goes so far as to have all the places closed on Sunday and Christmas, no exceptions.

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

I just had to post this:



Of course that's not the full segment, but it's hilarious xD

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

I just watched that episode. That was nicely done.

I also liked his conclusion that in the end of this conflict gay people will still end up with gay marriage while the biased crowd will get type 2 diabeters.

Stewart makes a few pretty good points about some of the exaggerated feedback to this incident though.

Re: This made me quite angry (Chick-fil-a and gay marriage)
 

Personally, I've liked what Conan O'Brien's been doing with it on his show. It concerns the Jim Henson Company (Muppets, Seasame Street, etc.) pulling its line of toys from Chick-fil-a over this issue, and how Chick-fil-a responded to that.





Of note too is a rather idiotic way CFA has been waging its PR battle on the internet:

http://static1.businessinsider.com/i...a-facebook.jpg