Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Article

tl;dr Chick-fil-a's charity wing (WinShape) will be reevaluating who they donate money to and only donate to apolitical groups. or "taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas".

So there you have it. Gay chicken breasts for some, tiny American Flags for others.

I fully expect Chik-Fil-A to go ahead and donate money anyway, right after the new shops open up.

However, if I am wrong, then I guess this means they weren't making such record profits in the summer as was reported.

Guess they buckled to pressures, and the hit to their bottom line.
Remember Kids, Peer Pressure is good sometimes

St. Jude's Children Hopsital can always take money for free treatment of kids with cancer... hint hint

You can't trust a hospital that doesn't know if it is Catholic, Jewish, or a Beatles reference. No, it must be the Riley Children's Hospital.

Charity war, fight!

But wait, the media made it clear that they were making money hand over fist with this! Remember all those news stories showing lines wrapping around blocks? How can this be so?

 Ahtman wrote:
You can't trust a hospital that doesn't know if it is Catholic, Jewish, or a Beatles reference. No, it must be the Riley Children's Hospital.

Charity war, fight!

Oh contraire no Godless Atheist hospital gets the X2 Because We're Jesus Freaks benefit. Scientists + praying priests beat the house odds baby!

 Ouze wrote:
But wait, the media made it clear that they were making money hand over fist with this! Remember all those news stories showing lines wrapping around blocks? How can this be so?

Well, It may have happened quickly, then pettered out.
If you run a restaurant you have to have a steady supply of customers. not just around the block for a day or two.

Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

Probaly to protect themselves and others. Remember the shooter in DC

edit
Also the female worker at the window that went on youtube

 Manchu wrote:
Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

It was both. The LGBT community has known about donations for groups supporting anti-gay legislation long before the CEO spoke. It just made the story go from sort of known to national debate. After the CEO spoke on his personal beliefs people tried to make it about him for their own political reasons but really it was about the company funding groups. Turning the story into the oppression of a rich white christian plays into some groups narratives, but the complaints were not what he did with his own personal income. Like any large debate there is distortion over time and media. Sort of like how abortion goes from "should the government make medical decisions for women" turns into "Gary Candidate likes to murder children and hates Jesus".

So Chik-Fil-A the company made donations to groups lobbying against gay marriage under its own then-existing policy of "not supporting organizations with political agendas"?

I'm seeing these two distinct issues:

(1) Chik-Fil-A was not living up to its own policies; and

(2) Something about gay people.

The article you linked seems to be Chik-Fil-A reaffirming its existing policies while pretending something is different than a few months ago regarding gays.

 Manchu wrote:
Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

Yep but don't let that get in the way of a good story.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

Yep but don't let that get in the way of a good story.

I thought that owner/president of the company donated to that lobbying group... not the company itself....

Right?

Anyhoo... good sammich.

 whembly wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

Yep but don't let that get in the way of a good story.

I thought that owner/president of the company donated to that lobbying group... not the company itself....

Right?

Anyhoo... good sammich.

The company donated. He endorsed. It doesn't matter though, because it's a private company.

They may not monetarily, But they do with food often.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 deathholydeath wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

Yep but don't let that get in the way of a good story.

I thought that owner/president of the company donated to that lobbying group... not the company itself....

Right?

Anyhoo... good sammich.

The company donated. He endorsed. It doesn't matter though, because it's a private company.

Yes, but it still has to deal with the consequences of its action's. Its their right to do it yes, its our right to protest and demand a policy change. IF they dont do a policy change, they arent getting business.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Yes, but it still has to deal with the consequences of its action's. Its their right to do it yes, its our right to protest and demand a policy change. IF they dont do a policy change, they arent getting business.

That's true. That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. But I'm not arguing that. I just meant that precisely who donated the money is irrelevant since the business is family owned.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Sorry, wasn't the hub-bub over what an individual (the president of the company) rather than what the company itself says/does?

Yep but don't let that get in the way of a good story.

Except it really wasn't about that, except to the people who wanted to be able to act like rich, white Christians are an oppressed minority. Certainly some didn't like what he said, but no one called for his arrest or censorship. His comments only brought what was already known to a much greater audience.

 Ouze wrote:
But wait, the media made it clear that they were making money hand over fist with this! Remember all those news stories showing lines wrapping around blocks? How can this be so?

So you're telling me that a single day of excellent sales doesn't make up for alienating gay people and gay friendly straight people forever?

So that means the mainstream media misrepresented the issue originally? Curse their liberal bias!

In my experience, "the liberal media" is like "the invisible hand of the free market"; you can't see either one because they don't exist despite the fervent wishes of those who wish to see them.

People in the media are for most part left leaning, but that for the most part doesn't actually effect their reporting

 youbedead wrote:
People in the media are for most part left leaning, but that for the most part doesn't actually effect their reporting

Well, it affects their reporting. Certainly most reporters and news organizations have SOME bias. But it's generally not any sort of conspiracy, nor are actual news organizations generally devoted purely to supporting one candidate or party.

 Frazzled wrote:
Yep but don't let that get in the way of a good story.

No, the company made direct payments to various organisations.

So please, do let facts get in the way of the fantasy you're trying to invent in your head.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
I thought that owner/president of the company donated to that lobbying group... not the company itself....

No, the company itself donated money. About $5 million all up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Well, it affects their reporting. Certainly most reporters and news organizations have SOME bias. But it's generally not any sort of conspiracy, nor are actual news organizations generally devoted purely to supporting one candidate or party.

Yeah, ultimately as with anything money wins out, and laziness comes a close second. This means they chase job security and promotion first and foremost, and once that's done they just report whatever gets told to them. A bunch of the people on FOX News are liberal, but they stand there and tell them to say what their bosses tell them to say because that's the station's way of business.

On news channels that aren't politically aligned and the reporter has more freedom, then they first and foremost spice up the story however they can, and do that by and large by repeating press releases from various competing factions.

There's news channels that AREN'T politically aligned?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
There's news channels that AREN'T politically aligned?

Nope.

All I know is that Chick-Fil-A makes the best chicken sandwich commercially available to me, with service that is actively polite. I dont' care if they give money to the Weathermen Underground or the Michigan Mlitia.

My dinner is not a political statement.

 Polonius wrote:
All I know is that Chick-Fil-A makes the best chicken sandwich commercially available to me, with service that is actively polite. I dont' care if they give money to the Weathermen Underground or the Michigan Mlitia.

My dinner is not a political statement.

WHAT THIS GUY SAID.

I dunno, I ordered a spicy chicken sandwich for lunch the other day -- you know how good those are -- and ended up with a chicken breast with no bun and a giant piece of lettuce in my order. So now I think I'm going to have to support gay marriage. Is that how it works?

 Ouze wrote:
In my experience, "the liberal media" is like "the invisible hand of the free market"; you can't see either one because they don't exist despite the fervent wishes of those who wish to see them.

Why is it that we agree on so many things?

http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/chick-fil-a-fails-to-live-up-to-promises-of-stricter-donation-guidelines

what is the world coming to when you can't even trust the sort-of promise made by a rich and eccentric business manager of a fast food corporation !