(04-24-2019 03:19 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(04-24-2019 03:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-24-2019 03:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-24-2019 02:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-24-2019 02:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I had CFA for lunch, and agree that they have a good product and run their business well. I am always impressed by the attitude and efficiency of their teenage staff.

But we both know the values they are talking about are not the freedom to decide who to bring on campus. I suspect it is because the owners of CFA have a strong Christian ethic. If I am wrong, show me the error of my ways.

I am a capitalist. If the students want to avoid eating at CFA as a protest against (whatever), fine, they will close and move. Problem solved.

I agree they can chose what the Hoot can chose what they want to serve. I am just curious as to why they find CFA objectionable.

help me here with some real answers. Or somebody else explain it to me.

You know why they find Chick-fil-A objectionable - it is the historical corporate support for groups that opposed same sex marriage, as well as the public statements from corporate leaders. However, I don't believe they donate to those orgs anymore and I don't see any comments entering the public realm.

So I am at a loss for why the students are making the change now. Chick-fil-A has been very silent for a while.

yeah, if the Hoot s making the point that students shouldn't eat food from a place that opposed same sex marriage, I think they are out of line. Let the students decide.

Of course, maybe President Buttigieg will ban them from the USA. Along with all other companies that do not toe the PC line. (J/K)

Even if the Hoot is making that point (which they are), their business model is based upon buying food from vendors X, Y, and Z and then making a profit off the markup associated with providing a service that brings the food to campus.

The only way for them to affect that change, is to stop selling it themselves...

And not sure why you made the comment about Mayor Pete - has he been outspoken about Chick-fil-A?

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/3/21/...-donations

I don't see the point in getting too worked up regarding those three more recent donations that the article references. It seems like CFA recognized that being outwardly anti same-sex marriage was not good for business and have conducted themselves thusly.

Ahhhh, I "see" why Chick-fil-A is back in the news. I say "see" because those donations are pretty tame and to at least two organizations that have rather broad goals.

The original ire aimed at Chick-fil-A back in 2012 made a lot more sense, IMO. This seems rather over the top - I mean, who thinks anti-gay when talking about the Salvation Army???