Friday, July 27, 2012

Chick-fil-A: The Verdict Is In!: Saturday Political Soap Box 31

After much great anxiety, I have devised my answer to the Chick-fil-A boycott dilemma, and it is one of those answers politically designed to straddle both sides and wind up pleasing no one.  Solomon's baby never had it so good.

Chick-fil-A does do good things.  The company has a friendly persona, makes itself accessible to families.  The toys in the kid's meals are generally more practical and educational.  It treats workers better than most fast food places, including advancement and scholarship opportunities.  Those who work there seem better attuned to the public.  Their food is not as nutritious as many home meals, but by fast food standards it does fairly well.  The founder, Truett Cathy, seems like a genuinely nice man.  And, like I said, they do make a damn fine sandwich.

As best as I can determine this is more that a freedom of speech issue by the company's founder and son.  This is company policy.  I have no problem with religious beliefs influencing a privately held business.  Unless those practices are discriminatory, which these appear to be.  Granted, the discrimination is not as blatant as some might state, but it does exist.  Whether it is in the extension of health insurance to same-sex couples, or them giving money to groups that try to de-gay people, or just in the comfort level of a gay couple coming to eat there, these mean that some discrimination exists.  And I don't care what you say about no employee discrimination.  You really think an openly gay person is going to advance to the top at Chick-fil-A?  Well, maybe if they were closeted and their last name Cathy.

Comments I received vary greatly.  Some said a boycott was good, but for one reason or another (against fast food, vegetarian, etc) they didn't really eat there anyway.  Well, I don't eat fast food often, but I must say that their chicken sandwich rules the roost, so I would definitely be giving up something. Others claimed that this was just the owner shooting his mouth off and it doesn't mean anything - that's not quite right either.  One person called me a bigot, I guess, well, I'm not sure why.

I will not fully boycott Chick-fil-A, mostly because I remain unconvinced that they are alone in their imperfections.  We start throwing stones, soon there will be no one left standing.  My friends who wish to boycott need to still convince me that there is something uniquely nasty about the Chick-fil-A position compared to other businesses, INCLUDING local, not just  national competitors.

On the other hand, I am not showing up on August 1st for Appreciation Day.  That sends the reverse message that you approve of their discriminatory practices and I most definitely do not.  So don't expect me there Wednesday.

And I will bang Chick-fil-A a little further down our list.  It will go from occasional to rare.  Lord knows, I need to eat better anyways.










3 comments:

  1. I have never eaten there and probably never will. From what I can tell, there is only one in Michigan anyway...in Rochester.

    ReplyDelete
  2. my family does not frequent there often anyways! We agree with your decision. It isn't cut out of the list but nowhere near the top either. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the point while undoubtedly they are not unique, they are public. Other companies.are public in their support of more positive causes (pepsi). You can only fight the evils you know about.

    ReplyDelete