Chick-Fil-A and Human Rights

Freedoms of religion, speech, press and peaceful assembly are among the most important human rights we have.  There is no “human right” to compel anyone to agree with one’s political, religious or other views.

To my regret, I did not dine at Chick-Fil-A yesterday. I live in the somewhat remote and rural highlands of the Republic of Panama and the nearest Chick-Fil-A is probably more than a thousand miles distant; going to one would have been inconvenient. However, many more people than usual apparently did find it convenient to go, judging by abundant photos on the internet.  Here is one:

I have seen no customer counts; perhaps they will come later. It seems reasonable to assume that there were many more Chick-Fil-A customers than normal, that some were expressing agreement with the owners’ views on the nature of marriage and that perhaps more were expressing disagreement with the positions of various government officials.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s former chief of staff, said: “Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values. They’re not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members. And if you’re gonna be part of the Chicago community, you should reflect Chicago values.”

Freedom of speech and religion are alien to Chicago values? Verry Interesting.

Other officials said that they would use governmental pressures — denials of licensing, abnormal frequencies of inspections and the like to keep the Bible humping thumping un-American jerks away from their cities.  Fascism? Nazism? Librulism? I don’t know. They all have means, some obvious and some easily concealed, to have their way.

The First Amendment, when last I read it, provided that Congress shall make no laws infringing our freedoms of religion, speech, press or peaceful assembly. Through the Fourteenth Amendment, those limitations on Federal authority apply to State and local governments. I am unaware of any amendment to the First Amendment, or even of an Executive Order expressly abrogating it (as distinguished from several nibbling away various bits and pieces).

An interesting collection of photographs of various (unrelated) right and left protests is presented here. The differences may be a tad subtle, so do look closely. Hint: those on the left tend to encourage violence and to manifest quaint (perhaps even antiquated) sensitivity to matters of personal hygiene.

There have been many reports of the Chick-Fil-A protests (I question the use of the word “protests,” but it seems to be the descriptor most commonly used.  “Appreciation” seems a better choice). Here’s a thoughtful report from Fire Dog Lake. It offers a remarkably unbiased and level-headed analysis.

There was a huge colon-clogging, gizzard glutting eat-in at Chick-fil-A on Sunset and Highland Wednesday for the Mike Huckabee-called, frothy Rick Santorum-embraced, Sarah Palin-endorsed, Rush Limbuagh-hyped “National Chick-fil-A Chick-fil-hAte Appreciation Day.” Two lines of cars snaked into the drive through ordering stations, backing up traffic onto Sunset Boulevard. I wish I had been able to take a snapshot of the woman in a nose job bandage eating a frozen dessert cone as she drove out. Very L.A.

The parking lot was full, and there were more people in line and on the patio than I had seen cumulatively in all the years I had driven by the deep-fried food scented corner.  Groups holding a rainbow flag and pro-LGBTQ signs stood on the corner with two (female) LAPD officers who were very nice. The protestors were out-numbered by the gluttons easily 1:10.

Consistently(?), this was a sign proudly carried by one protester and published at the Fire Dog Lake site:

Many if not most patrons dining at Chick-Fil-A would probably agree with the sentiment expressed by the sign; the report did not deal with that possible dichotomy.

Here’s a piece from The Daily Beast reflecting on the situation. The first paragraph was written by a Lesbian Chick-Fil-A employee four days ago, when there was talk of boycotts:

So when people boycott Chick-fil-A, it means I don’t get hours. Which means I don’t get money. Not just me, but ALL of the LGBT employees at Chick-fil-A. Yes, CFA hires LGBT people. No one’s been fired for being gay or coming out. It’s a job.  A job that can’t be taken for granted when work is scarce across the country. We have to eat too. So sure, boycott Chick-fil-A because you don’t agree with the CEO.  Will you change his mind? No. Will it change the amount of money my LGBT peers and I can earn?  Probably. Boycotting Chick-fil-A doesn’t hurt the company. It hurts the employees. And it’s hard enough working for a place that doesn’t think you should get married. But it’s work. Don’t take it away because you feel righteous. (Emphasis added.)

Following yesterday’s Chick-Fil-A “protest” she had something of a change of heart:

We were so busy we nearly ran out of food. We did run out of some things, like nuggets, strips, lemonade, and waffle fries. Though we didn’t have to close early like we feared, by 10 p.m., we barely had anything left. Never before have I been so grateful that I have tomorrow off.

Customers sang “God Bless America” in the dining room. They vocalized their support for “family values” in a way that made me want to vomit.

Dear me! I hope she didn’t yield to her urge.

We had two protestors outside, and I took five minutes to run out, hug them, and tell them: if I weren’t working here now, I’d be out here with you.

. . . .

The evangelical bigots have their ignorance bases covered. Chick-fil-A employees, LGBT or not, will be absolutely fine. Bible thumpers are going to voice their support with greenbacks, as they always have done.

When this first started, I implored my friends and allies not to boycott. Now, if I didn’t work there, I’d be boycotting too. That much hypocrisy and hatred leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and the last thing I want to eat is their chicken. (Emphasis added.)

Oh well. Hypocrisy is bad and it’s encouraging that she has none of it. Still, perhaps she shouldn’t eat at Chick-Fil-A, even if the food there is provided to employees free or at a discount.  It’s her choice.

In the meantime, here’s a statement from Chick-Fil-A’s extremist, rabble-rousing, hate-spewing moral dictator wannabe and Executive Vice President for Marketing:

We are very grateful and humbled by the incredible turnout of loyal Chick-fil-A customers on August 1 at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country. We congratulate local Chick-fil-A Owner/Operators and their team members for striving to serve each and every customer with genuine hospitality.

While we don’t release exact sales numbers, we can confirm reports that it was a record-setting day.

Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day was not a company promotion; it was initiated by others. 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 understand from news reports that Friday may present yet another opportunity for us to serve with genuine hospitality, superior service and great food. (Emphasis added.)

The vile hatred evidenced there is remarkable, particularly in contrast to the love and good will shown in the Fire Dog Lake post quoted and linked above.  The reference to an event on Friday is probably to a National Same-Sex Kiss Day in support of the homosexual community.

Activist Carly McGehee told GLAAD she was inspired to call for the “kiss in” because an economic boycott of Chick-fil-A didn’t go far enough.

I wonder how much additional business Chick-Fil-A got because of the boycott.

“Change will not come if we are sitting at home behind closed doors,” she said. “We need to show not just the Chick-fil-a company, but the rest of the country that our numbers are great. By participating in the kiss in, thousands of people will get out of the house and show their support for LGBT equality.”

On Fox, Huckabee said, “If they believe that this will help their cause – to put people of the same sex kissing each other in front of families – if they believe that will encourage people to be more sympathetic, then more power to them.” (Emphasis added.)

Former Governor Huckabee refrained from saying that if they believe that people of the same sex kissing each other in front of families will encourage others to be more sympathetic they may be in for some big surprises. It was kind of him to avoid diminishing the surprises awaiting them. He did say that

he has no problem with gay rights supporters organizing a counter-protest for Friday.

“That’s America,” Huckabee said on Fox News Thursday morning. “As long as they’re orderly. As long as they don’t disrupt the flow of customers and traffic.”

If Same Sex Kiss Day proceeds on Friday as contemplated (It has not yet been declared a national holiday; if President Obama gets a second term, who knows?), here are some excellent but probably unnecessary suggestions from Red State.

Same sex couples are staging a “kiss in” Friday at various Chick-Fil-A restaurants. If you think this is to demonstrate a widespread level of support for gay marriage, you’re wrong.

The purpose is to bait someone on the right into doing something stupid.

The left would like nothing more than to capture on camera someone:

  • yelling at a gay couple
  • assaulting (shoving, hitting, etc…) a gay couple
  • telling a gay couple to “go to hell” or using other obscene language
  • getting in a gay couples face
  • employees forcibly escorting someone from the premises (call the police if feel this is required)
  • giving a gay couple the middle finger
  • angrily scowling at a gay couple

I don’t know any conservatives who would do that sort of thing. They will instead use the most grievously cruel insult to obnoxious attention seekers known to modern humanity:  ignore the buggers.

Sticks and stones may break my bones
but words can never hurt me.

In the present context, abusive words hurled at them will inflate their egos, not diminish them. If you have young children, perhaps consider not taking them. Ignoring the protesters’ pitiful pleas for attention in all other respects will insult and hurt them and their supporters more grievously than anything else could. It will show not one iota of respect for them, but much for your own dignity and restraint. Boycott them.  Don’t even “turn the other cheek;” walk past or if necessary around them without looking at them.  Look instead at a flower, the sky, your spouse or even the Chick-Fil-A menu.

Then, on Saturday (Chick-Fil-A is closed on Sundays) and later,


According to this Power Line article,

According to one account, Chick-fil-A’s corporate headquarters told its outlets to expect a 15 to 20 percent increase in business yesterday, while the actual increase may be closer to something like 200 percent.  I suspect that Chick-fil-A’s business is going to enjoy a permanent step-up in business as a result of the Left’s attack.  This makes all the more hilarious Michael Hiltzik’s Los Angeles Times column the other day (I’m linking it here since nobody reads the LA Times any more, and no wonder) saying that Chick-fil-A’s owner Dan Cathy made a business mistake by speaking his mind on traditional marriage:

Read more at the link.

About danmillerinpanama

I was graduated from Yale University in 1963 with a B.A. in economics and from the University of Virginia School of law, where I was the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review in 1966. Following four years of active duty with the Army JAG Corps, with two tours in Korea, I entered private practice in Washington, D.C. specializing in communications law. I retired in 1996 to sail with my wife, Jeanie, on our sailboat Namaste to and in the Caribbean. In 2002, we settled in the Republic of Panama and live in a very rural area up in the mountains. I have contributed to Pajamas Media and Pajamas Tatler. In addition to my own blog, Dan Miller in Panama, I an an editor of Warsclerotic and contribute to China Daily Mail when I have something to write about North Korea.
This entry was posted in Chick-Fil-A, Christians, Constitution, Culture, Dignity, free speech, Headlines, Ideology, Law and Order, Media, Opinion, Political Correctness, Politics, Religion, Same-sex marriage, United States and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Chick-Fil-A and Human Rights

  1. Joe,

    My parents were well aware of my views and I saw no reason to conceal them from Mr. Hoy. To have acquiesced by silence in an assumption that I must be a Christian would have been untruthful. It could also have made me uncomfortable later at St. Stephens during morning chapel and sacred studies classes. As it was, I felt no discomfort, got some good (and favorable) insights into Christianity and at the same time gained a very high opinion of Mr. Hoy and those of like view. Christianity is not my enemy, it is my friend and I like it that way.

    As to my age, I was born on June 17, 1941.

    Mr. Laffer and I may have been in some economics classes together but I have no recollections of him from Yale.

    As to Douglas Adams, I suppose he could be characterized as a “leftist,” but I prefer to think of him as a liberal in the old fashioned sense of the word. BBC has done lots of good stuff. Yes, Prime Minister was a great series; Rumpole of the Bailey was another. The BBC Hitchhiker’s Guide audio series was great, sound sound effects and all. From that sprang the book and ultimately the five volume “trilogy.” Still, as I may have noted in an earlier comment, Adams’ Last Chance to See was his favorite; it has the same type of humor as his fiction but does not detract from the serious nature of the substance. As to video versions of Hitchhiker’s Guide, don’t bother. Based on what I have seen, they are terrible. All of the necessary imagery comes through in the audio versions (particularly Adams’ own readings); as with most motion pictures, much is left out and visuals are substituted, to ill effect.

    I like fiction and sometimes take the time to read it; I would probably be even more insane otherwise. W.E.B. Griffin did excellent multi-volume series on WWII and the Korean Conflict. With the exception of the fictional characters, the books are largely factual and accurate as best I have been able to determine. His characterizations of General MacArthur, for example, seem to be right on point – a great general (as witness the Inchon invasion) but far too reliant upon staff officers, particularly his G2 (chief of intelligence), General Charles A. Willoughby, who consistently assured him that there was no danger of a North Korean invasion of South Korea and later that there was no danger of Chinese intervention — even when it happened he tried to minimize its significance. General Willoughby flattered General MacArthur by telling him what he wanted to hear rather than ascertainable facts that would have been unpleasant for General MacArthur to hear; no dummy, General Willoughby most likely knew where and how to get and verify facts but realized that they were not what General MacArthur wanted to hear.


  2. Pingback: Opinion Forum » If President Obama Serves Another Term Nearly 10,000,000 Americans Will Die

  3. Pingback: If President Obama Serves Another Term Nearly 10,000,000 Americans will Die. | danmillerinpanama

    • joe barton says:

      thanks for the link. I’m going to pass it on to my friends at “The Big Apple Coffee Party.”
      I told you that I used to attend these “Coffee Party” meetings. At the time, the biggest focus of all their energies was planning these Boycott Koch Industries actions with signs and flyers in front of Koch owned companies. I would politely try to point out to them all the negative sides of boycotts and suggest that we focus our energies on promoting publicly financed elections. They would come back with a justification that just didn’t make sense. When I pointed it out they would just switch to a different argument that was equally illogical. This would continue until they came back to the original argument where I would repeat the original refutation. We would then go through a circle with the same arguments that were already made.

      Eventually, I would point out that the Koch brothers’ combined wealth makes them the richest people in the country, if not the world. Their resources are astronomical. We are like amoebas next to them. Plus, they could just call their friends over at Fox News and get them to promote a counter “buy”-cott for them. Wouldn’t it be better to promote the public financing issue?
      “That’s a separate issue” they would say.
      “But isn’t it really the same issue? Isn’t the Koch brothers’ ability to influence policies with their money actually the whole crux of the issue?”
      At this point they would then go into a tirade about how evil the Koch brothers are, how evil corporations are and how they must be stopped!
      Public financing! Public financing would stop them!” I would say.
      “That’s a separate issue.” And so on and so on.
      See what I’m saying, Dan? Hopeless pathetic losers.

      It really gets me how liberals like these are so willing to wage war on the people who work for these companies all so that they can delusionally “get even” with the Koch brothers.
      They are eager and willing to accept tons of collateral damage in order to “get’ the Kochs when containing them would be much better both morally and effectively.
      Isn’t that why they protested the war in Iraq?

  4. Joe,

    Again, thanks for your comment. As to Agnosticism, I was raised as a Methodist but started reading stuff by Benedict de Spinoza, Arnold Toynbee, Bertrand Russell and others when I was thirteen or so. It was a gradual transition.

    As eleventh grade approached, my parents and I agreed that private school would better prepare me for college than the local public high school and we decided on St. Stephens School for Boys, an Episcopalian boy’s day school in Alexandria, Virginia. During an admissions interview I made my religious views known to the headmaster, an Episcopalian priest, Mr. Hoy (Father Hoy to the High Church kids), and he expressed no problem. The teachers were great and we had small classes of between ten and a dozen students. The Dean of Students and English teacher, Mr. Wills, impressed me on our first meeting. He mentioned several poets, Frost, Kipling and Burns, if memory serves, who were already among my favorites.

    Coat and tie were required and when a teacher or other adult entered the classroom we stood until asked to take our seats. There were daily chapel services, which I attended as required. When others stood, I stood. When they sat, I sat. When others sang or recited prayers, I didn’t. No problem. There was a required weekly sacred studies class for seniors, conducted by the headmaster. There, I think I learned a bit about Christianity. We had interesting discussions, Mr. Hoy was gentlemanly (I hope I was as well) and made no noticeable efforts to impose his views. I had been advised of the required chapel services and sacred studies classes before enrolling and had no objection to the requirements. My experiences there gave me great respect for the religious views of others with whom I disagree and who do not try to force their views on others.

    Peaceful boycotts strike me as exercises of free speech and I don’t object to them, although I have never participated in one. I also view them as counterproductive, particularly when widely publicized or based on what appears to me as hatred. I may well have missed some, but I am not aware of any significant conservative/religious boycotts of businesses owned by or Librul/anti-religious types on account of those views.

    • joe barton says:


      That’s some pretty heavy duty reading for thirteen. No wonder you wound up at Yale.
      I was still reading Marvel Comics at that age. However, my parents had a subscription to Time magazine and I loved reading that too. Time definitely sparked my interest in social and political issues. I can vividly remember the issue that had the question “Is God Dead?” on the cover. That copy came out in April of 1966 when I was ten years old. I don’t remember actually reading the article and I’m sure I wouldn’t have understood much of it if I had but that cover and that question left a deep and lasting impression on me.
      I was shocked and puzzled by it. Why would anyone ask a question like that? It was blasphemous. God can’t die. He always was and always will be. But of course, it was too late. The idea had already been planted in my mind. That’s how Satan works his way into your head.

      I went to Catholic schools where I was taught by nuns in primary school and Brothers in high school. Practically everyone in my neighborhood was either German/Irish/Italian Catholic. The only non-Catholics I knew were Jews because my neighborhood bordered Jewish ones and some families leaked across those borders. I knew little about Protestants and found them to be very mysterious. I’m still pretty ignorant about Protestantism.

      In Catholic schools you are taught very conservative social values yet very liberal political/economic ones. The exact opposite of Libertarianism. The fact that, as we grew up, about half of us rejected the conservative values but continued to embrace the liberal ones, while the other half went the opposite way, is evidence that those tendencies are genetically influenced, in my opinion. I have a theory as to why that is.

      I had another couple of questions for you, Dan.
      Where did you grow up? And what is your ethnic background? I figure Miller is most typically an English name but every Miller I knew was German.

      • joe barton says:

        Oh, I forgot to mention, one conservative boycott that backfired.
        The Dixie Chicks boycott. Remember that one?

      • Joe,

        My mother’s maiden name was Woolwine, obviously German. There were also English and Scots in the gene pool on her side. She was very much of old Virginia and I so consider myself. On my father’s side there were mainly Irish. I claim them all, rather proudly but probably have no right to do so since I had no say in causing it. As to where I grew up, I haven’t yet done so and plan to resist as long as I am able. Born in Washington, D.C. just before WWII, my early years were in Philadelphia, to which my dad’s office was moved soon after WWII began. Thereafter, in Northern Virginia.

        Have you read much of Douglas Adams’ stuff? He is best known for his brilliant fiction such as the Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy five book “trilogy,” the first volume of which is based on a BBC series of the same title he wrote (audio recordings of his readings of various bits of his more popular fiction are available free for download on the internet). However, his favorite was Last Chance to See, describing his world travels with a biologist to see various endangered species. It has the same humorous approach as do most of his other works. An audio recording of Adams reading a bit of that is also available on the internet.

        Adams’ (1952 – 2001) more serious works were posthumously collected in Salmon of Doubt. He called himself a “radical Atheist” but acknowledged in an address to an American Atheists group that he did so principally for emphasis. I claim him as an Agnostic, a label which he rejected as too much like the rather wishy-washy Church of England. He was “convinced” that there is no God, but did not “believe” that there is none. There is a significant difference if one thinks about it. One of my favorite essays in Salmon of Doubt, asks “Is there an artificial God. It’s well worth reading so I won’t tell you his conclusion or how he got to it. The entire collection is worth reading.

        Adams’ memorial service was rather a traditional Church of England one with a welcome by the Reverend Anthony Hurst on behalf of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, a few words by Richard Dawkins, a blessing by the Revered Hurst and organ music by Bach. I suspect that neither Adams nor Bach was not offended.

        • joe barton says:

          Thinking about your pre-college evolution and trajectory to Yale, that was rather bold to admit your religious skepticism to the headmaster. Did your parents know about that? I’m sure I would have just kept my mouth shut and gone along. I didn’t get bold until I got older. Did any of the other kids express their doubt or skepticism?

          Trying to guess your age, I estimated around 70 or so based on your graduation year at Yale. You said you were born just before WWII. Would that be in ’39 or ’41 when the good guys (us, the US) entered and made it official? I have an older brother who was born in ’44. You’re just outside the Baby Boom years but you’re practically a baby boomer, you lived through those years while at a young age.
          I was watching an interview with Arthur Laffer yesterday and they flashed his bio on the screen, BA economics, Yale “63, just like yourself. Did you know him/remember him? You must have been in the same classes together.
          I see that you were also the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review, but that doesn’t necessarily make you smart. After all, Obama was the editor or something of the Harvard Law Review, wasn’t he? When are we going to see those transcripts?

          I actually have read none of D. Adams’ stuff other than a bit you posted on your blog. It does look very interesting. Smart, clever stuff. He likes to show how we deceive ourselves, which is particularly true in politics. I can’t remember the last time I read any fiction. I’ll tell you something about that. Just the other day I was watching the movie Sideways where Bart Giamatti plays an aspiring novelist. Someone tells him that he doesn’t read fiction because there is so much stuff to read and he wouldn’t want to waste it on fiction. He’d rather watch a movie. A look of disgust and condescension comes over Giamatti’s face. I was a bit offended because that is exactly how I always felt! Not so much that reading fiction is a waste (you can learn a lot from that too, plus it can be a pleasure) but I read so slowly and there’s so much to read and so little time to do it.

          I remember an episode of Cosmos with Carl Sagan where he stood next to a very long bookcase and said that it represented every book ever written. He then said that if you were able to read one book a day for your entire life, you would only get this far, and he points to a place only a small fraction away from the beginning of the bookcase. His conclusion? Pick the right ones. That made me feel vindicated.

          As for the Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, while never actually reading it, I’ve come across it at various times over the years. I first came across it from listening to the Pacifica Radio station in New York. The hosts and listeners of a particular show were really big fans and would often times do readings on the air. (this made me think it had a left-wing slant because Pacifica is very left-wing)

          I also remember PBS television broadcasting episodes, years ago. Maybe these were the BBC series you mentioned. Then, isn’t there a recent movie version with Morgan Freeman?
          I could see that the Hiker’s Guide had a small (relatively) but very devoted following (is that what they call a cult?) Unfortunately, I never focused long enough during any of these opportunities to get a good sense of it. But it does seem worthwhile. However, I would prefer to watch it on my sofa in front of the TV screen rather than wasting my time reading it (just kidding) Is there something on DVD you’d recommend? How about the Freeman movie?

          I noticed that you wrote some stuff on Paul Ryan. Looking forward to reading it.

  5. Doug Matthews - University of Virginia '84 says:


    I would completely agree that it would be inappropriate for any Mayor to actually take legal action against Chick-Fil-A for its owner expressing his belief. However, there is certainly nothing wrong with members of the public, including the Mayors that spoke up, criticizing the views of the Chick-Fil-A owners. The First Amendmendt applies to both. On the merits of the issue, regardless of how you try to justify it, opposing the rights of two consenting adults to marry based on people’s particular religious views is simply bigotry. When you were at U.Va., Virginia still outlawed interracial marriage, and opponents of interracial marriage claimed Biblical justification for that positon. The parallels between the hate-based racial segregationists of that era echoed in the opposition to same-sex marriage today. In my children’s lifetime, I expect that they will look back at those Chick-Fil-A supporters as we look back today at those who opposed interracial marriage and supported business owners from permitting African-Americans to sit at the lunch counter. Chrisitians should turn their religious energies into love for their fellow man, not trying to justify discrimination and hatred.

    • Doug,

      People in their private capacities can favor or oppose same sex marriage as they please, subject to various hiring, employment and similar laws. Government officials may not, however, use their positions to impose penalties or different permitting, inspection or other conditions based on such matters. Threatening to do so dampens freedom of speech little less than actually carrying out the threat.

      An Agnostic, I can’t speak for Christians or suggest whether they are being un-Christian. There are Christians on all sides of the issue. You say,

      Chrisitians should turn their religious energies into love for their fellow man, not trying to justify discrimination and hatred.

      As phrased I agree, but would extend the suggestion to others as well. However, I have seen no justification for any proposition that all or even some who went to Chick-Fil-A to express their support for the rights of the company’s owner to support traditional Christian values did so due to hatred. Please compare the quote from Fire Dog Lake, also linked in the article. That quote seems full of hatred.

      • joe barton says:

        Hey Dan,
        Hey Dan,
        Interesting post, as usual. I’d been wanting to ask you if you were religious. I never detected any overt religiosity in your writings so it’s not a surprise that you are an Agnostic. I am too. How did you come to your agnosticism? Did you have a religious upbringing?

        I’ve always been opposed to boycotts on several grounds. I’ve been involved with groups like MoveOn for years and more recently the Coffee Party (which started as a response to the Tea Party movement) and they are obsessed with boycotts. Most of their meetings are spent organizing the latest boycott because of something said, that they find offense with, by someone with financial or business interests.
        I’ve pointed out to these people that boycotts are at best ineffective, at worst counterproductive (witness the counter-protest) and, if they ever did work, would only serve to stifle free speech and hurt the people who work for the companies (as was pointed out in your post by the Lesbian employee.)
        I’ve also always had suggestions for alternative courses of action that could actually do some good for every American no matter what point of view they have.
        For instance, instead of boycotting Koch Industries’ products, focus our energies on promoting public financing of elections so that billionaires (left or right) can’t use the unfair, undemocratic and corrupting power of money to influence our political system. This way everyone’s right to voice their opinion remains intact while creating a level playing field where ideas can be judged on their merit rather than a deceitful and manipulative advertising campaign.
        Unfortunately, despite talking to hundreds of these people over the years I have yet to meet a single person who agrees with this obvious and common sense idea.
        That’s why I’ve come to the inescapable conclusion that the left are a bunch of hopeless pathetic losers.

        Protests (as opposed to boycotts) are good as long as they are smart and civilized. Unfortunately, the left has a habit of being stupid, obnoxious and sometimes even criminal.
        I’ve also been involved with the Occupy Movement. What a dismal experience that was. My worst fears were realized as I watched a promising movement devolve into a physical fight with the police, some of the very people who you should want to have on your side. That sad Movement is now effectively irrelevant.
        Hopeless pathetic losers.

  6. Pingback: » Chick-Fil-A and Human Rights » Tea Party Tribune

  7. Boeke says:

    “According to one account, Chick-fil-A’s corporate headquarters told its outlets to expect a 15 to 20 percent increase in business yesterday,”

    I don’t know how you format citations here, but:



    • I don’t understand whatever point you are attempting to make. Of course they expected (but underestimated) an increase in business. What has that to do with your claim that “the Chik-fil-A advertising campaign was a big success?” I am unaware of any basis for a claim that there was any relevant Chick-Fil-A advertising campaign and you have provided none.

  8. Boeke, you say Since I saw them bragging about increased sales I assume it was about some advertising campaign. Declared or not. Assume whatever you will. However, your assumptions do not become facts. Nor are they worthy of further comment.

  9. Boeke says:

    Looks like the Chik-fil-A advertising campaign was a big success.

    “…Chick-fil-A’s corporate headquarters told its outlets to expect a 15 to 20 percent increase in business yesterday, while the actual increase may be closer to something like 200 percent. I suspect that Chick-fil-A’s business is going to enjoy a permanent step-up in business as a result …”

    • Boeke, On what basis do you contend, with no citation or other support, that it was a “Chik-fil-A [sic] advertising campaign?”

      • Boeke says:

        I only know what I read here about this matter. I don’t read newspapers or watch commercial TV, and this is the only place I’ve seen any mention of Chick-fil-A. Since I saw them bragging about increased sales I assume it was about some advertising campaign. Declared or not.

        Are citations a new requirement on your blog?

  10. Pingback: Opinion Forum » Chick-fil-A and Human Rights

  11. Michael B. Calyn says:

    Reblogged this on Ye Olde Soapbox.

  12. lee zeltzer says:

    Dan as you now I rarely agree with your political stands, but on this I stand with you. The right to free speech is more important than the content of the speech. Although, like you I am far from a Chick-Fil-a, I respect right of the owners to say what they believe as much as the right of the people to disagree with them. Now I want a fried Chicken Sandwich.

  13. MaddMedic says:

    Reblogged this on INTERNED in Northfield!!!.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s