Jason G wrote:I will continue to eat at chik-fil-a on the occasions that I do eat at fast food restaurants. My reasoning is
1) Apparently they have stopped funding organizations that are 100% anti-gay organizations and even donate to some charitable organization that are pro-gay. Source with citations http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/k ... it/c2n0g1e
There are url's in your own link that says otherwise. Such as; http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2011/04/video-chick-fil-a-winshape-loveisherecom-marriage-experts-who-stand-against-our-own.html
Jason G wrote:2) It would be naive to think you are NOT patronizing other organization with extremely right-wing leadership who have an anti-gay agenda. So really you are boycotting chick-fil-a solely based on the fact that their owner actually publicly admits his stance, because you ARE patronizing other anti-gay organizations trust me.
The difference being your speculations on probability vs. publicly announced facts. It would be absurd to boycott a business based purely on speculation.
Jason G wrote:3) A bit hypocritical to boycott a place that donates to anti-gay organization when you probably own large quantities of stuff assembled by slave labor in China which you likely have no remorse about. I mean that is much worse that gays not being able to marry on the human rights scale. No one is standing up for those people and demanding to pay more for their goods.
This is a fallacious argument. Not only for, again, your speculations on probability vs what is already on the table. If a retailer makes a public announcement that they think businesses have right to sell products that are made by slave labor, then I am willing to bet that they would be subject to boycotts as much as, if not more than the scale of the boycott campaign on Chick Filet.
Also, acting solely against one injustice is not hypocritical. Using your example, one could go on and on in attempts to establish irrelevant connections . i.e. Being against human rights violations in China is a bit hypocritical unless you are also against abusive coal mining practices in KY, PA and WV.
BTW; "No one"? There are many organizations standing up for Chinese, as well as laborers in other countries. But that's another thread.
Jason G wrote:So let chik-fil-a donate their entire profit to anti-gay organizations for all I care, its not going to change the fact that within a few years homosexuals will have all the rights we have no matter who is trying to stop it.
You're probably right. However, justifying pouring fuel on a fire just because you know that the fuel will eventually be exhausted at an undetermined time doesn't make sense. i.e. How many LGBT couples will not have the same access and say as a hetero couple with their dying partner in the mean time?
Jason G wrote:So at face value it may be a noble gesture to say "I'm not going to eat there" but if you really think about it its not something you should have a guilty conscious about.
It has nothing to do with any noble gestures or guilty consciouses...at least for me. It has everything to do with simply not wanting my money to ultimately support efforts that I am against.