Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Totally agree btw with the two posts above. I think the actual franchise owners are fantastic, the employees always greet you and bring your food to your table with a smile. My beef (pardon the pun) is with the CEO and high ups
Well you have some valid points. My sister-in-law's brother, who owns the franchise, is SUPER religious. I mean really.
My coworker wanted to open a franchise but he was turned away for not being religious.
Never been to Chick Fil A. How is it different than the other fast food restaurants? When the one in Leesburg opened last year, some people camped in front of the restaurant over night. What's so special about Chick Fil A?
People were probably camped out over night due to the promotion they do each time they open a new store. The first 100 people in line get a free meal each week for a year
I could care less how they conduct their own business, thats private industry as long as they adhere to workers rights, and I commend them in trying to instill a sense of something greater than just work and money in their employees. My problem is when that goes from something internal to them, to something that they actively politically and financially support like anti-gay rights. Thats when it falls into the category of mind your own damn business, and this is when I could start throwing scripture back at them showing the hypocracy of their actions. It gives people who are faithful and good people a bad name and is adding to the reason why religion in this country as a whole is going down the drain.
Religion has nothing to do with politics. Both groups should keep them separate, when religion entangles with politics you start having a serious contradiction to the same tenants that these religious people espouse that were spoken by that "dude with long hair". When politicians incorporate actual policy with it... well I think we all know that the founders did not intend for that.
'Gay-rights' is not a political thing, that is a social belief. Until this country says in writing that being gay is something you are born as, it is simply a matter of what you believe. For Chick-Fil A they believe being gay is a choice and it's wrong. If you disagree fine, but at least they aren't running away from that stance. And McDonald's gives money to pro-gay rights organizations, are you okay with that? Isn't that 'political' too? It would seem pretty hypocritical to get mad at Chick Fil A about supporting organization that are against homosexuality, but then not make the same issue about McDonald's for being for homosexuality? If this is strictly because of, in your own words, "actively politically and financially support like anti-gay rights" of these organizations, then is your issue really with the fact that they give money to a particular 'political' cause or what they believe? It appears to me, that you disagree with their beliefs which goes back to my original point, don't go there! No one is going to blame you for not supporting them, but don't single them out just because their beliefs don't center around yours and you expect them to change them. There are literally thousands of organizations that probably believe or support something that you never would, but you probably would still patronize them, not even realizing it.
On a side note, why is it everytime someone makes a thread about Chick-Fil A, people always brings this up? You can probably find something that you don't like about every company out there where you feel as though they mistreated customers or even employees, but for some reason none of these other companies get the type of criticism that Chick-Fil A. Can we stick to the topic please and just talk about this new location?
'Gay-rights' is not a political thing, that is a social belief. Until this country says in writing that being gay is something you are born as, it is simply a matter of what you believe. For Chick-Fil A they believe being gay is a choice and it's wrong. If you disagree fine, but at least they aren't running away from that stance. And McDonald's gives money to pro-gay rights organizations, are you okay with that? Isn't that 'political' too? It would seem pretty hypocritical to get mad at Chick Fil A about supporting organization that are against homosexuality, but then not make the same issue about McDonald's for being for homosexuality? If this is strictly because of, in your own words, "actively politically and financially support like anti-gay rights" of these organizations, then is your issue really with the fact that they give money to a particular 'political' cause or what they believe? It appears to me, that you disagree with their beliefs which goes back to my original point, don't go there! No one is going to blame you for not supporting them, but don't single them out just because their beliefs don't center around yours and you expect them to change them. There are literally thousands of organizations that probably believe or support something that you never would, but you probably would still patronize them, not even realizing it.
On a side note, why is it everytime someone makes a thread about Chick-Fil A, people always brings this up? You can probably find something that you don't like about every company out there where you feel as though they mistreated customers or even employees, but for some reason none of these other companies get the type of criticism that Chick-Fil A. Can we stick to the topic please and just talk about this new location?
I think it's very useful for Tysons Engineer to have raised this. Chick-Fil-A has some presence, but not a huge presence, in NoVa, and as they expand into new locations potential customers may want to know what political activities they are subsidizing, at least indirectly, when they patronize a chain restaurant. It's not unique to Chick-Fil-A; same thing happened with Domino's and Cracker Barrel. People in NoVa may feel differently about this than people in the area of Georgia where Chick-Fil-A is based.
The notion that gay rights is purely a "social belief," and not a "political thing," is manifestly incorrect, as demonstrated by the volume of laws in local jurisdictions, enacted by politicians, that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. I don't know about the laws in NoVa, but as a part-owner of a business in DC you can bet we are subject to many such laws, violations of which can result in significant sanctions. You could be squarely against those laws and still ought to recognize that they exist in the realm of politics. It's not inconceivable that, at some point, Chick-Fil-A will run afoul of some of them (yes, pun intended) locally. The owners aren't hosting people for a private dinner, but instead are subject to the same labor laws as other employers.
I think it's very useful for Tysons Engineer to have raised this. Chick-Fil-A has some presence, but not a huge presence, in NoVa, and as they expand into new locations potential customers may want to know what political activities they are subsidizing when they patronize a chain restaurant. It's not unique to Chick-Fil-A; same thing happened with Domino's and Cracker Barrel.
The notion that gay rights is purely a "social issue," and not a "political thing," is manifestly incorrect, as demonstrated by the volume of laws in local jurisdictions, enacted by politicians, that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. You could be squarely against those laws and still ought to recognize that they exist in the realm of politics. It's not inconceivable that, at some point, Chick-Fil-A will run afoul of some of them (yes, pun intended). The owners aren't hosting people for a private dinner, but instead are subject to the same labor laws as other employers.
Gay rights is really a "human rights" issue so I can see where some people take exception to Chick-Fil-A because they may believe that they are suppressing human rights. If you believe what science backs up that homosexuality is something that you are born with a not a choice, it becomes a human rights issue--same as skin color. If Chick-Fil-A were advocating against certain races based on skin color people would be outraged.
But, this discussion probably does belong on anther board.
I think it's very useful for Tysons Engineer to have raised this. Chick-Fil-A has some presence, but not a huge presence, in NoVa, and as they expand into new locations potential customers may want to know what political activities they are subsidizing when they patronize a chain restaurant. It's not unique to Chick-Fil-A; same thing happened with Domino's and Cracker Barrel.
The notion that gay rights is purely a "social issue," and not a "political thing," is manifestly incorrect, as demonstrated by the volume of laws in local jurisdictions, enacted by politicians, that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. You could be squarely against those laws and still ought to recognize that they exist in the realm of politics. It's not inconceivable that, at some point, Chick-Fil-A will run afoul of some of them (yes, pun intended). The owners aren't hosting people for a private dinner, but instead are subject to the same labor laws as other employers.
I don't disagree about the laws part, but he mentioned their contributions to 'political' organizations. If we were talking about discrimination against customers or employees, then this would indeed be political. Just as there are laws against discrimination against someone's sexual orientation, there are also laws against someone's race, religion, and even age. Those type of subjects aren't inherently political, it is only when they revolve around a law that it is political, which again, was never mentioned.
And I understand that Chick Fil-A has expanded in NoVa quite a bit, but I just believe, especially by people on this forum, that they are always singled out not because of what they do, but because of what they believe. It is just ridiculous. I don't see any other companies get the criticism that they do on this forum. If they want to support certain organizations, then that's their business, let them, but you don't have to support them.
Chipotle kicked out a large number of illegal workers out of their businesses in this region, which rubbed some people the wrong way, but I guarantee you if someone brings them up, they aren't and haven't received the same scrutiny that Chick Fil-A has. I just believe it's a double standard. We don't analyze every business principles that comes here, so why would Chick Fil A be any different?
Gay rights is really a "human rights" issue so I can see where some people take exception to Chick-Fil-A because they may believe that they are suppressing human rights. If you believe what science backs up that homosexuality is something that you are born with a not a choice, it becomes a human rights issue--same as skin color. If Chick-Fil-A were advocating against certain races based on skin color people would be outraged.
But, this discussion probably does belong on anther board.
There's no law to support that. It has not been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone that is born homosexual. Yes, saying that is the equivalent of saying that sexual orientation is equal to race. That is more of a political theory than a scientific fact. If Chick Fil-A discriminates against someone because of their sexual orientation, they would indeed be breaking the law because it is indeed a law, but if they decide to support an organization that is anti-gay, if you will, then it is not the same as supporting an organization that is anti-Asian for instance. Until this country recognizes homosexuality as something that you are born with, then there is no comparison between race and sexual orientation.
Chipotle kicked out a large number of illegal workers out of their businesses in this region, which rubbed some people the wrong way, but I guarantee you if someone brings them up, they aren't and haven't received the same scrutiny that Chick Fil-A has. I just believe it's a double standard. We don't analyze every business principles that comes here, so why would Chick Fil A be any different?
Well, because the workers at Chipotle were illegal. Who can really complain about that? Whether you agree with the current immigration laws or not, Chipotle was trying to follow the current laws and no one can really blame a business for doing that.
As I said earlier, if Chick-Fil-A is donating to organizations that have an agenda to suppress human rights, I can see where people would have an ax to grind on that matter. *I'm not sure they are doing that, just going off of what I've briefly read. McDonald's appears to be giving to organizations that help people in times of need as well as advocating for equal rights for gays. Equal rights is never perceived in a bad way so they don't catch that flack.
There's no law to support that. It has not been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone that is born homosexual. Yes, saying that is the equivalent of saying that sexual orientation is equal to race. That is more of a political theory than a scientific fact. If Chick Fil-A discriminates against someone because of their sexual orientation, they would indeed be breaking the law because it is indeed a law, but if they decide to support an organization that is anti-gay, if you will, then it is not the same as supporting an organization that is anti-Asian for instance. Until this country recognizes homosexuality as something that you are born with, then there is no comparison between race and sexual orientation.
Of course there is no law yet. But science gets closer and closer and closer to defining homosexuality as a biological condition versus a choice. That is why the country is moving towards rights for gays.
You ask why Chick-Fil-A is being singled out and this is one of the reasons. Like it or not, the country is moving towards acceptance of gays being able to live they way they feel that they have been born. To see an establishment going against that is just going to rub many people the wrong way. And as time marches on, more and more people won't like it.
Of course there is no law yet. But science gets closer and closer and closer to defining homosexuality as a biological condition versus a choice. That is why the country is moving towards rights for gays.
You ask why Chick-Fil-A is being singled out and this is one of the reasons. Like it or not, the country is moving towards acceptance of gays being able to live they way they feel that they have been born. To see an establishment going against that is just going to rub many people the wrong way. And as time marches on, more and more people won't like it.
I personally think the only reason why this country is moving towards this way is because there are more gay people in high places. Let's be honest, there are organizations that discriminate against different races of people, but do not get the type of criticism as this. The only reason why this is becoming a bigger deal is lobbying people in high places.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
