General Food, Dining and Nightlife News

[danbrotherston]

*sigh*....you know, I really didn't want to talk about this again, but here we are with you calling me (and others) a hypocrite with misleading arguments. Worse, you are arguing that I (and others) shouldn't even be allowed to express an opinion about which businesses should be supported and which should not, which is a highly confusing point to take in the name of freedom.

So, I find that pretty that all all a little insulting. But I digress, here's why your argument is misleading.

Chik-a-fil doesn't *ONLY* support Salvation Army (an organization that I also do not support), they (and especially their founders) have also supported a numerous other anti-LGBTQ organizations. And they have made explicit statements against LGTBQ individuals, and have made clear their philanthropy is explicitly about opposing same sex marriage. This is not the same, and in fact, explicitly opposite many of the other companies you have stated which are either neutral, or explicitly supportive of same sex marriage and LGBTQ rights.

And yes, they have tried to separate their corporation from this advocacy as of late...because not doing so is a financially and legally precarious thing not to do, it is clear the owners (and primary financial benefactors) maintain this belief and can continue to use their significant financial resources (which one contributes to by patronizing the restaurant) to advocate against LGBTQ rights in private.

You have chosen one tiny piece of information (the support of the salvation army) and tried to form an argument around it, while ignoring all the surrounding context which significantly invalidates the argument that all these companies are the same. As I stated, I don't like Salvation Army, and I don't support them, and I don't like that other companies may support them, but that is not the same as those companies and their owners adopting an explicitly stated agenda against LGBTQ individuals, and you really should know that.

Now, I'm not saying that you can't support them, or that I even care if you do, but if you're going to come here and talk about it, then I (and others) have every right to respond. If our responses make you uncomfortable, you should ask yourself why. If you want to explain it to us why, that's fine too, but I (and others) still have the right to rebut those arguments as well.

If you learn how to Google things you'll find other companies that have done the same thing, involving donations to people, organizations, etc.

This was the first my first hit, with thousands of others:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021...ions-study

Remember, thousands of companies that we deal with every days are just as guilty as Chick-Fil-A. The difference with Chick-Fil-A is that it's easier to target (like we did in Kitchener) a small business (because it's a franchise) that hires many new Canadians and less than stellar wages (because they are willing to work for less). I personally find this racist. Why, because the same folks won't picket corporations that have deep pockets and are oozing white privilege. That's an opinion, though, just so we're clear.

Sorry that I triggered you though, that was unintentional. It was done more to educate people, but you didn't see it that way. Though my guess is because you worked at Google and felt uncomfortable with what I was saying. That's an opinion, though, just so we're clear.

And, Dan, I didn't call anyone a hypocrite -- I said IF they (people) decide to continue to support so-called anti-LGBTQ+ businesses and organizations, THEN it makes you a hypocrite when you cherry pick other businesses out. This isn't an opinion, just so we're clear.

That said, if the real reason for calling out Chick-Fil-A is due to their religious beliefs, then say it. Because this is what it could be about. Which is fine -- but religions don't have to go out of their way to support certain groups if they feel it's against their core religious beliefs (despite many churches hypocrisy when it comes to things of this nature). Just say you don't like their religious beliefs and how their religion deals with the LGBTQ+ community. Not that I think (to be clear, in my opinion) it absolves anyone if they're dealing with other companies, but at least it makes it a little more clear.

Transparency, people.

"Just the same"...you find this "racist"...oh boy that's rich, and ridiculous to a level I don't think is worth touching.

And you did call people, including myself hypocrites. You pretend to qualify it but you qualify it with using some of the most common companies around (and I already explained why your reasoning is false).

Yes, I worked at Google, but I have no emotional attachment to any company I work for, so at least that one made me laugh.

I have no religious objection to them, I have many friends who attend Christian churches, none of them see my other friends in the LGBTQ community as less deserving of rights as the owners of Chik-a-fil do--THAT is what I object to.

I'm not triggered, I am calmly and coherently replying to your points, because I believe it is an important issue to discuss. If anyone is triggered, it's the person randomly playing the race and religion cards.

Look, with this rambling and accusatory response here it's clear you're very defensive about this. I have no idea why.