ronnie_suburban wrote:I'll never eat at one of these places and it has nothing to do with their food.

=R=

+1. But I did back in high school, before I knew better. Just one of many things from the 80's I don't do any more

I agree. There is one in Skokie that would be an easy choice for us, but we don't eat there. The reasons have nothing to do with the food.

Sorry, I guess I’m uninformed. What are the reasons?

D.

dodger wrote:Sorry, I guess I’m uninformed. What are the reasons?

They only like chicken sandwiches on Sunday when Chick-fil-A is closed, is what I assumed

dodger wrote:Sorry, I guess I’m uninformed. What are the reasons?

D.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick-fil ... ontroversy

Dave148 wrote:

dodger wrote:Sorry, I guess I’m uninformed. What are the reasons?

D.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick-fil ... ontroversy

I understand the reasons that people may boycott eating at a Chick-fil-a, but I also think that they get a bit of a bad rap. Dan Cathy has said some things, based on his religious beliefs and upbringing that can be considered anti-LGBTQ. At one point their charitable arm also donated to organizations considered anti-LGBTQ, but they no longer contribute to them. While he has said some things, at no time have his restaurants denied service to people based on those beliefs. By not eating at a Chick-fil-a, are you punishing Cathy or are you punishing the franchise owner who may not share those same beliefs?

In addition, Chick-fil-a donates large amounts of unused food to food banks, funds scholarships for their workers, does lots of community work, and in times of need have opened the restaurants to help feed people.

https://www.chick-fil-a.com/About/Giving-Back

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/na ... /85865412/

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation ... 41932.html

Appreciate the civil conversation on this. It's a nice change of pace to what we're all probably used to.

I love the food at chick fil a but have decided to stop eating there as well. But I'm not going to criticize others for continuing to do so.

WhyBeeSea wrote:Appreciate the civil conversation on this. It's a nice change of pace to what we're all probably used to.

I love the food at chick fil a but have decided to stop eating there as well. But I'm not going to criticize others for continuing to do so.

Agreed, well-said, and let's please keep it that way. Normally, we'd nix any political-leaning discussion but politics are fairly intertwined with Chick-Fil-A these days, so as long as things stay civil here, this should be fine.

Thanks,

=R=
for LTH

thetrob wrote:By not eating at a Chick-fil-a, are you punishing Cathy or are you punishing the franchise owner who may not share those same beliefs?

In addition, Chick-fil-a donates large amounts of unused food to food banks, funds scholarships for their workers, does lots of community work, and in times of need have opened the restaurants to help feed people.

I have a couple of thoughts on this. I'll start with the positive - I don't know of a fast food chain that treats its employees better than this one appears to and that means a great deal to me. And there's no question that the company does some good in the world via some of its charitable contributions. That said, I can't support a company whose leadership has made the conscious choice to go out of its way to support legalized discrimination based on sexual orientation, no matter what drives their decision to do so.

Regarding the idea that people who choose not to patronize the place are hurting franchise owners as well. In Chicago, virtually every franchise owner opened after the controversy was very much in the public sphere, so no, I have no qualms whatsoever about not contributing to their profits.

Thanks, I don’t need any more info.

D.

MarlaCollins'Husband wrote:

thetrob wrote:By not eating at a Chick-fil-a, are you punishing Cathy or are you punishing the franchise owner who may not share those same beliefs?

In addition, Chick-fil-a donates large amounts of unused food to food banks, funds scholarships for their workers, does lots of community work, and in times of need have opened the restaurants to help feed people.

I have a couple of thoughts on this. I'll start with the positive - I don't know of a fast food chain that treats its employees better than this one appears to and that means a great deal to me. And there's no question that the company does some good in the world via some of its charitable contributions. That said, I can't support a company whose leadership has made the conscious choice to go out of its way to support legalized discrimination based on sexual orientation, no matter what drives their decision to do so.

Regarding the idea that people who choose not to patronize the place are hurting franchise owners as well. In Chicago, virtually every franchise owner opened after the controversy was very much in the public sphere, so no, I have no qualms whatsoever about not contributing to their profits.

The statements from Dan Cathy were back in 2012, in them he stated his Christian beliefs and views about what marriage was. I would venture to guess that most devout Christian owners of any franchise share the same beliefs, whether it makes national news or not. Since 2012 they have stopped giving money to anti-gay groups and back off political and social debates. Cathy has also publicly said he regrets the comments and regardless of what people think he "sincerely cares about all people".

The Civil Rights Agenda, which dubs itself the largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy group in Illinois, said Chick-fil-A agreed in meetings to stop donating to groups such as Focus on the Family and the National Organization for Marriage. Such groups oppose same-sex marriage.

Chick-fil-A said that its nonprofit arm, the WinShape Foundation, “is now 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” In addition it has stated, "the Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 2,000 restaurants run by independent Owner/Operators. "

What a corporation owner or spokesman says has little bearing on whether I eat there or not. I choose not to eat a Subway because the food stinks, not because of what Jared did. If I have a particular anti-gay, racist, political, or whatever experience at an establishment that is not positive, I may choose to not return ever, but that may also be a single location, not the whole chain.

I fully respect your decision to not frequent their establishments. In the grand scheme of things it's a fast food restaurant that serves a decent product, but there are plenty of other choices out there, and we all need to do what is right for our own selves and beliefs.

Although I've had their product and it was decent, I prefer to give my business to small individual spots (like Big Guys, which isn't much farther away for me). Those folks are the true warriors of fast food and deserve the shout out!

Wasn't this all over about 5 years ago? Public outcry seems to have achieved the desired outcome years ago. What has Chick-fil-A done to offend anyone lately? Not being sarcastic; honestly curious.

Sometimes people don't look past the initial fog. If they did, they may see some interesting things. At the end of the day, to each their own. Just be consistent.

I happened to be at the Merrillville,In location today around 1PM and they were mobbed despite the fact that schools are already in session. Long lines at both the drive-thru and interior and parking was a hunt.

I don't have a problem with Chick-fil-A but don't get me started on Papa John

Disappointed to see a moderator introduce politics to these discussions. In my view, we get enough of this stuff everywhere else during our day. I’m sure its all well meaning, and more so, there’s been a page of reasonably civil discourse, so congrats to all. That said, I think we’ve got the gist, can we return to food based discussions now and leave the politics out of it?

Pursuit wrote:Disappointed to see a moderator introduce politics to these discussions. In my view, we get enough of this stuff everywhere else during our day. I’m sure its all well meaning, and more so, there’s been a page of reasonably civil discourse, so congrats to all. That said, I think we’ve got the gist, can we return to food based discussions now and leave the politics out of it?

I really didn't mean to stir up a hornets' nest but I find it almost impossible to separate this entity from its politics, mainly because it has been so public about them. That said, I'm grateful for the civility of the discussion here.

Many thanks,

=R=

A lot of the Chicagoland franchises saw a significant increase in sales after the controversy as many people did not like the bullying tactics of their opponents.

stoutisgoodfood wrote:Although I've had their product and it was decent, I prefer to give my business to small individual spots (like Big Guys, which isn't much farther away for me). Those folks are the true warriors of fast food and deserve the shout out!

... and Big Guys Chicken Pierre is a very tasty item especially with the signature dipping sauce.

I order it about half the time.

Food is inherently political so trying to separate the topics will just kneecap discussion.

gnarchief wrote:Food is inherently political so trying to separate the topics will just kneecap discussion.

Quite true, just ask Marion Nestle. But we're not setting precedent with this thread. We're just making a specific exception because it's pretty much impossible to have a meaningful conversation about Chick-Fil-A without politics being a part of it. As long as the discussion on this thread remains civil and productive, there's no reason it cannot continue.

=R=
for LTH

The city’s first Chick-fil-A with a drive-thru is coming to a new retail development at 1113 S. Jefferson Street in the South Loop, according to a real estate report.

https://chicago.eater.com/2019/1/2/1816 ... tion-intel

thetrob wrote:At one point their charitable arm also donated to organizations considered anti-LGBTQ, but they no longer contribute to them.

Not true, according to the above Wikipedia link, which states, "As of April 2018, Chick Fil-A reportedly continues to donate to anti-LGBT groups." They cite four references for that statement, including this one:

Chick-fil-A is still bankrolling anti-LGBTQ causes

I would not put all my faith in what Wikipedia states.

nsxtasy wrote:

thetrob wrote:At one point their charitable arm also donated to organizations considered anti-LGBTQ, but they no longer contribute to them.

Not true, according to the above Wikipedia link, which states, "As of April 2018, Chick Fil-A reportedly continues to donate to anti-LGBT groups." They cite four references for that statement, including this one:

Chick-fil-A is still bankrolling anti-LGBTQ causes

That reference is from 2017, and many of the other references are from years ago. The last cited/ verified donations were from 2015, and were to the Salvation Army, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and to a youth home in Vidalia.

If you choose to not eat there because of this then so be it. I would posit that if you dig enough into any Corporation you can find something to give you reason to not use their services or frequent their establishments.

Putting politics aside, what is the actual allure of this place? The food is mass produced, low-level crap, and virtually indistinguishable from any other fried fast food chicken sandwich out there. I just don't get it what there is to be excited about.

=R=

ronnie_suburban wrote:Putting politics aside, what is the actual allure of this place? The food is mass produced, low-level crap, and virtually indistinguishable from any other fried fast food chicken sandwich out there. I just don't get it what there is to be excited about.

=R=

I mostly agree, except I do consider it a very good chicken sandwich, definitely above "low-level crap". Would I wait in line or go out of my way for one? Probably not.

Part of its allure may be its regional scarcity up until the late 2000s... I think the closest one was in Racine for a long, long time.

ronnie_suburban wrote:Putting politics aside, what is the actual allure of this place? The food is mass produced, low-level crap, and virtually indistinguishable from any other fried fast food chicken sandwich out there. I just don't get it what there is to be excited about.

I mostly agree, except I do consider it a very good chicken sandwich, definitely above "low-level crap". Would I wait in line or go out of my way for one? Probably not.

Part of its allure may be its regional scarcity up until the late 2000s... I think the closest one was in Racine for a long, long time.

“Low-level crap”. Well, that’s an opinion, just not a very good one. The place serves a fine chicken sandwich and the rest of their offering is good quality. Is it on par with the best local fried chicken places that have popped up in recent years? Nope, not intended to be.

Chik-fil-A is a fast food joint and nothing more. That said, it happens to be one of the best run, most consistent, most courteous fast food chains in the business. Iconic in the industry for these reasons. In addition, they do a lot of charitable good, treat their employees better than their competitors generally do, and when there is a local emergency, its not uncommon to see the local shop opening up to feed people for free.

You don’t like one aspect of their politics and won’t buy a sandwich from them in protest. More power to you! Me? I think there is a lot to be impressed with, and political outrage is just kind of done for me. So, when I get a hankerin’ you’ll find me marveling at just how fast that line went, and how good, moist and tasty that samich was.

And clearly learning how to quote correctly is “kinda done for me” too. Sorry about that

Cathy2 wrote:I would not put all my faith in what Wikipedia states.

The article cited above, on which that Wikipedia entry is based, includes a link to the actual Form 990 filed by the Chik-Fil-A Foundation, as well as 22 other links to references to support the other statements in the article.

thetrob wrote:The last cited/ verified donations were from 2015, and were to the Salvation Army, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and to a youth home in Vidalia.

As noted in the referenced article:

article in thinkprogress.org wrote:the Chick-fil-A Foundation gave more than $1 million in 2015 (nearly one-sixth of its total grants) to the the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. The religious organization, which seeks to utilize athletes and coaches to spread Christian teachings, imparts a strongly anti-LGBTQ message. Staff and volunteers with the organization have been required to adhere to a strict “sexual purity” policy, prohibiting any “homosexual acts,” even for married couples. The group takes the view that, “The Bible is clear in teaching on sexual sin including sex outside of marriage and homosexual acts. Neither heterosexual sex outside of marriage nor any homosexual act constitute an alternative lifestyle acceptable to God.”

The foundation also gave more than $200,000 to the Paul Anderson Youth Home, a Georgia-based “transformative organization” that operates a “Christian residential home for troubled youth.” Focusing on boys, their teachings include the idea that the “sexual, physical, and mental abuse of children, mostly in the alleged ‘safety’ of their own homes has produced all kinds of evil throughout the culture to include the explosion of homosexuality in the last century.” The myth that people are LGBTQ due to abuse is a claim frequently made by anti-LGBTQ organizations to promote harmful “ex-gay” therapy.

Additionally, the Chick-fil-A Foundation gave at least $130,000 to the Salvation Army. The religious organization has a long history of anti-LGBTQ housing discrimination, opposition to same-sex marriage equality, and supporting exemptions from non-discrimination ordinances. One page on its website, entitled “The Salvation Army and the LGBT Community,” boasts that the group adheres “to all relevant employment laws, providing domestic partner benefits accordingly.’ Given that only a minority of states explicitly bar anti-LGBTQ discrimination, that’s a low bar.

The Human Rights Campaign’s most recent scorecard rates Chick-fil-A a 0 on LGBTQ-inclusive policies (or lack thereof). With its continued foundation giving to those who preach anti-LGBTQ values — at least $1.4 million in 2015 alone — it does not appear that the group has yet lived up to its promise to focus on poultry.

So they were still supporting anti-LGBTQ organizations several years after the controversy arose. I'll believe that they no longer do so when I see a reputable source that says they've stopped, rather than idle speculation.