NewsWithViews.com
NewsWithViews on Pinterest NewsWithViews on Google+


Additional Titles

Other
Wall
Articles:

Chick-Fil-A Versus the Radical Gay Agenda

In Mexico, The Body Count Continues to Mount

 

More
Wall
Articles:

 

 

 

 

CHICK-FIL-A CHICKENS OUT

 

By Allan Wall
September 19, 2014
NewsWithViews.com

There is a battle in our country over same-sex marriage and one of the theaters is the world of business.

The purveyors of the Homosexual Agenda have moved the goalposts. It’s no longer enough to leave homosexuals alone. Now, even to oppose same-sex marriage is to make oneself a target.

The Chick-fil-A drama shows how the same-sex marriage lobby wields great influence and is able to bully rich Americans into towing the line. After all was said and done, despite the great support from the grassroots, Chick-fil-A chickened out.

A little background is in order. Chick-fil-A is a successful American fast food chain, based in the Atlanta area, which specializes in chicken sandwiches.

The company is owned by the Cathy family, who are devout Baptists. One of the company’s hallmarks is that it closes on Sundays, almost unheard of for a fast food chain.

Many customers like the restaurant’s food, and Chick-fil-A has done well.
In 2012 Chick-fil-A was at the center of a media firestorm involving the powerful gay lobby, which has much clout in today’s society.

It’s important to point out that the Chick-fil-A company was accused of doing nothing concrete to any individual homosexual person.

No Chick-fil-A store was accused of refusing to serve gay customers, nor of refusing to hire gays as employees, nor of firing gay employees, nor of supporting violence against homosexuals. No, there was nothing like that. The Chick-fil-A folks were not accused of any direct attack against gay individuals.

That’s not what it’s about these days. There is a Gay Agenda, and if you speak up against that, you are in hot water. That’s what Chick-fil-A’s Dan Cathy, the family member who runs Chick-fil-A, did.

A lot of corporations donate money to various causes, and many support the Gay Agenda.

Chick-fil-A through its charitable arm known as the WinShape Foundation, had donated money to several organizations which oppose gay marriage and the Radical Gay Agenda. This made the company a target.

When interviewed by Baptist Press, Chick-fil-A, President Dan Cathy affirmed that "We are very much supportive of the family - the biblical definition of the family unit.”

On a later talk show interview, Mr. Cathy stated that "I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage'. I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about."

When these donations and statements were noised abroad to the general public, the radical gay activists and supporters went into a tizzy. There were calls for protests and boycotts against the company, other companies broke ties with Chick-fil-A and city governments tried to prevent them from opening stores in their municipalities.

On the other hand, some notable individuals spoke up for Chick-fil-A. Even the American Civil Liberties Union defended the company’s right to free speech. Mitt Romney, however, then the GOP candidate for president, refused to defend Chick-fil-A even on free speech grounds.

Grassroots supporters of Chick-fil-A found a great way to support the company. On August 1st, 2012, Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day, thousands of supporters showed up at Chick-fil-A restaurants to support the company by buying its products.

The company enjoyed record-breaking sales. An average Chick-fil-A restaurant had 29.9 percent more sales than usual, and 367 more customers than on a typical Wednesday business day.

It was a great victory for freedom of speech and a great show of support for Chick-fil-A. It showed that social conservatives too could use the economic weapon.
But even before Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day, the company was already beginning to backpedal.

In July of 2012, a month before the Appreciation Day, a company statement said that "Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”

In September of 2012, a month after Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day, a pressure group called “The Civil Rights Agenda” had already reported that Chick-fil-A “ceased donating to organizations that promote discrimination, specifically against LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) civil rights.”

By March 2014, the company’s tax reports indicated that Chick-fil-A had indeed stopped donating funds to all the organizations that the Gay Agenda groups had objected to, with one exception – the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, which the same-sex promoters consider anti-gay. The FCA may be next to go.

In that same month, Dan Cathy expressed his regrets for having brought his company into the controversy.

Subscribe to NewsWithViews Daily Email Alerts

*required field

To summarize, Dan Cathy of Chick-fil-A opposed same-sex marriage, stood up for traditional marriage and was attacked. Grassroots supporters turned out to support the company, and Chick-fil-A profited. Rather than follow up on that victory, Chick-fil-A chickened out and surrendered to the Same-Sex Marriage Agenda.

And that’s what the gay lobby activists wanted all along.

Dan Cathy still claims to personally oppose same-sex marriage. However, when it came to high-profile support for traditional marriage,

Chick-fil-A chickened out.

� 2014 Allan Wall - All Rights Reserved

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing




Allan Wall recently returned to the U.S. after residing many years in Mexico.

Website: www.allanwall.info

E-Mail: [email protected]


 

Home

When these donations and statements were noised abroad to the general public, the radical gay activists and supporters went into a tizzy. There were calls for protests and boycotts against the company, other companies broke ties with Chick-fil-A and city governments tried to prevent them from opening stores in their municipalities.