Danno went to Chick-Fil-A

[Penny Lane 8,159]

good for you too... the kids are adding an 's' nowadays.

Is that what "gfy" means?

Totally not what I thought...

[SMOKE 1,426]

Is that what "gfy" means?

Totally not what I thought...

you were right.

[Danno 1,228]

Actually, so far in this whole flap there has only been one group told "You are not welcome here" -Mainstream religious people.

And it wasn't said by a business man, what makes it so outrageous is it was said by the Government... with threats of government retaliation.

All because a person does not agree with something that is illegal in most parts of the country.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Danno

[^_^ 5,021]

you were right.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Nashua, NH Chick-Fil-A To Sponsor NH Pride Fest

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/08/01/nh-pride-fest-organizer-nashua-chick-fil-a-owner-to-sponsor-us/

[X Factor 1,113]

i went for breakfast...super busy

i went for lunch...super busy

i'm going for dinner...i'm expecting the same.

this might turn out to be the best day in chick-fil-a history.

Looks like the whole thing has been a boon for Chick Fil A.

[B_J 2,752]

We ate at Chick-fil-A for lunch. We couldn't get in the parking lot so we had to park across the street. The line inside was over 50 people. As we sat at our table eating, the line never got shorter, people just kept coming in. We left at around 2:15 and it was still packed. We drove around to a few other Chick-fil-A restaurants and they were all just as crowded even though it was well past the lunch rush.

Interesting thing was, as I talked to other people in the restaurant, nobody was anti-gay and I didn't hear anybody say anything angry or intolerant at all. Most were there just to support the idea of the owner having the freedom to voice his opinion. The best part was that even though the line was long, nobody in the line complained. Everybody just talked to each other and waited their turn.

Eat more Chikin.

[X Factor 1,113]

We ate at Chick-fil-A for lunch. We couldn't get in the parking lot so we had to park across the street. The line inside was over 50 people. As we sat at our table eating, the line never got shorter, people just kept coming in. We left at around 2:15 and it was still packed. We drove around to a few other Chick-fil-A restaurants and they were all just as crowded even though it was well past the lunch rush.

Interesting thing was, as I talked to other people in the restaurant, nobody was anti-gay and I didn't hear anybody say anything angry or intolerant at all. Most were there just to support the idea of the owner having the freedom to voice his opinion. The best part was that even though the line was long, nobody in the line complained. Everybody just talked to each other and waited their turn.

Eat more Chikin.

Did you have the chicken sandwich?

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

I happen to think Chick-Fil-A's food tastes like #######, so the decision not to eat there is pretty easy for me.

and another thing mox and i agree on.

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

gfy!

got fired yesterday?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't get the support for the CEO expressing his opinion, but the boycott makes little sense either unless the company was discriminating against gay employees and/or customers.

As to why it doesn't make sense supporting the CEO by eating there - imagine if we were talking about a chain called, Akbar's Chicken, and the CEO, Akbar, openly expressed his opinion that 911 attack was the fault of U.S. presence in the M.E., would people eat at his place to show their support for his opinion, even if it were inflammatory and unpopular?

Or... suppose it was a chain called, Bubba's Chicken and the CEO said the Oklahoma City bombing was the fault of the ATF and its 'jack-booted thugs,' would people support him expressing his opinion by eating at his restaurant on a special day?

CEO's have a right to express their opinions, but people also have a right boycott the company that CEO represents, even if it's in response to his opinion about a controversial topic. Supporting the CEO for giving his opinion though seems misplaced, unproductive and only further divides the country. Those who want to eat there, should eat there, but they don't need make it into a political statement.

[Karee 4,191]

I don't get the support for the CEO expressing his opinion, but the boycott makes little sense either unless the company was discriminating against gay employees and/or customers.

As to why it doesn't make sense supporting the CEO by eating there - imagine if we were talking about a chain called, Akbar's Chicken, and the CEO, Akbar, openly expressed his opinion that 911 attack was the fault of U.S. presence in the M.E., would people eat at his place to show their support for his opinion, even if it were inflammatory and unpopular?

Or... suppose it was a chain called, Bubba's Chicken and the CEO said the Oklahoma City bombing was the fault of the ATF and its 'jack-booted thugs,' would people support him expressing his opinion by eating at his restaurant on a special day?

CEO's have a right to express their opinions, but people also have a right boycott the company that CEO represents, even if it's in response to his opinion about a controversial topic. Supporting the CEO for giving his opinion though seems misplaced, unproductive and only further divides the country. Those who want to eat there, should eat there, but they don't need make it into a political statement.

So boycotting the place is not making a political statement? Seems to me you can't have it both ways.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

So boycotting the place is not making a political statement? Seems to me you can't have it both ways.

Of course it is, just like CEO giving his opinion on a controversial topic. It makes no sense to support a CEO for making his opinion public about a controversial subject and treat as if the man should be able to openly express his opinion. Of course he has a right to his views. But traditionally (a once conservative ideal), prominent people (private or public) have understood that once they make their opinion public about a controversial topic, they've just turned it into a political statement. Those supporting the CEO for having an opinion are trying to dismiss it as him merely having an opinion and ignoring the elephant in the closet.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is a good Op/Ed piece published in today's Arizona Republic:

Given all the news coverage and social media onslaught you might actually believe that scenes of people standing in long lines at Chick-fil-A restaurants Wednesday had something to do with tolerance versus intolerance, gay rights versus "traditional values," right versus wrong.

It didn't.

The Chick-fil-A media circus only proved that in America is it possible for citizens to conduct a vast, national argument in which both sides are wrong and both sides are faking it.

It began when the head of the company, Dan Cathy, declared his support for traditional marriage and was condemned by those who disagree.

Then it got out of hand.

It's OK to agree with the head of Chick-fil-A for saying he supports traditional marriage and to patronize his restaurants in order to show your support.

Just as it's OK to disagree with him over the fact that the philanthropic subdivision his company – WinShape – gives millions of dollars to defeat same sex-marriage initiatives and to not patronize his restaurants because of his views. (Or because of your cholesterol. Or because you're a vegetarian.)

But it's idiotic for political figures like the mayors of places like Boston, Chicago and San Francisco to say the company is not welcome in their towns because of the boss's views.

Would they do that for any other business professionals?

Doctors, for example?

Or professional football team owners?

Or players?

Likewise, it's silly for others to say they would ONLY patronize businesses that adhere to their more "traditional" values. Chicken sandwiches don't really test that claim.

When a parent brings a child to an emergency room with a life-threatening condition does he ask about the sexual preference of the treating physician?

Do we ask the political views of the paramedics who respond our calls for help?

If someone were breaking into your house would you tell the 911 operator to only send Christian officers? Or only Republicans? Or Democrats?

For that matter, do you want the best plumber for the job or the one who agrees with you politically?

Do you want the best auto mechanic or the one who shares your views on marriage?

Do you think any of the passengers on the U.S. Airways flight that safely landed in the Hudson River in 2009 cared about religious beliefs or political persuasion of Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger?

Before purchasing any product or service do you require a representative of the business to fill out a questionnaire in order to assure that their religious and political beliefs match yours?

I didn't think so.

We're actually smarter than that. Thank God.

(Unless you don't believe in God, which I may or may not care about, depending on how well you make chicken nuggets.)

http://www.azcentral...JMontini/167822

[SMOKE 1,426]

I don't get the support for the CEO expressing his opinion, but the boycott makes little sense either unless the company was discriminating against gay employees and/or customers.

As to why it doesn't make sense supporting the CEO by eating there - imagine if we were talking about a chain called, Akbar's Chicken, and the CEO, Akbar, openly expressed his opinion that 911 attack was the fault of U.S. presence in the M.E., would people eat at his place to show their support for his opinion, even if it were inflammatory and unpopular?

Or... suppose it was a chain called, Bubba's Chicken and the CEO said the Oklahoma City bombing was the fault of the ATF and its 'jack-booted thugs,' would people support him expressing his opinion by eating at his restaurant on a special day?

CEO's have a right to express their opinions, but people also have a right boycott the company that CEO represents, even if it's in response to his opinion about a controversial topic. Supporting the CEO for giving his opinion though seems misplaced, unproductive and only further divides the country. Those who want to eat there, should eat there, but they don't need make it into a political statement.

inflammatory statements about terrorist acts & mass murder = a guy saying he doesn't support gay marriage. priceless dude.