Ethics, Chick-fil-A, And Oreos

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

While “making a purchase is not an endorsement of the philosophy of the business,” there may be other ethical concerns at play. When that business donates $2 million dollars to groups that are hell-bent on denying civil rights to a particular group, an individual’s purchase contributes (albeit by a minuscule amount) to a cause s/he may find morally offensive.

The group, One Million Moms, responded to the rainbow Oreo, created in support of Gay Pride month, called for a boycott of Kraft. Kraft, like Chick-fil-A, entered into advocacy and that advocacy becomes a legitimate factor in the purchasing decision.

The moral dilemma occurs when a person is confronted with the decision to purchase a product from a company that uses its profits for an advocacy that the person finds morally unacceptable. Those who find same-sex marriage morally unacceptable face the dilemma when purchasing Kraft products. Those who see same-sex marriage as a civil liberties issue fact the same dilemma when purchasing from Chick-fil-A.

When a person purchases products from a company with an advocacy agenda, that person is helping to support, even in a minor way, that agenda. A minuscule contribution is still a contribution.

Throughout our history, civil liberties have been denied to various groups of individuals for various reasons. I have heard no reasonable justification for the denial of civil liberties based on sexual orientation. Until Chick-fil-A provides a reasonable justification for their denial of civil liberties, I find their actions morally reprehensible. As much as I like those chicken sandwiches, something else will have to alleviate my hunger and my conscience.

H/T: Michael LaBossiere, HuffPo.

70 thoughts on “Ethics, Chick-fil-A, And Oreos”

  1. “mahtso:
    ‘Q: do you have a civil liberty to marry two husbands?’
    Does the state have a reasonable justification to prevent two people in love from marrying? “

    In the abstract, I’d say no. (But tell that to the man who wants to marry his brother.) But we are not dealing solely in the abstract for the simple reason that these same two people will be getting government benefits by virtue of that marriage.

    So, I ask: will a man be allowed two husbands (or more)? One husband and one wife each? Incestuous relationships? How will these changes affect programs in which benefits are based on the number of people in a household, such as Medicaid? On what basis do we distinguish same sex marriage from polygamy/polyandry? Or is there no basis to do so? Or do people see these questions as the same as the (absurd) ones about marrying a car or dog?

  2. Blouise, Of what league do you speak? Your sanctimony is showing and since you’re obviously Barney Fife, you’re out of bullets. And, you missed me, but did hit your foot.

  3. @Pat: The Chick-Fil-A CEO (Cathy) can say whatever he wants, I do not want to restrict his free speech. In fact hooray for free speech, because it helped to expose a homophobic bigot that should be punished for his exclusionary views.

    “Free Speech” means the government cannot pass laws on speech and cannot punish people for what they say. In that sense, the Mayors that have declared Chick-Fil-A unwelcome are completely out of line, constitutionally, and if they actually take any action against Chick-Fil-A they should be sued vigorously.

    However, “Free Speech” places no restraints on citizens, and we can use Cathy’s views to boycott, picket, or curse his restaurant or its patrons, anything short of threats or lies. That is OUR free speech in action.

    Hooray for anyone that has the rocks to stand up to rich bigots and do their best within legal bounds to deny them profits, those are the real heroes because they deny power and money to those using power and money to demean and harm others.

    The market for chicken sandwiches will still exist when Cathy is out of business, and hopefully that market will be in the hands of somebody less inclined to see themselves as a High Priest and more inclined to treat employees with respect.

  4. Mr. Cathay’s remarks make no difference to me as to whether I will buy his product. I am sure I buy a ton of things from people with whom I have fundamental disagreements. I applaud him for not hiding his opinions behind donations to PACs and the like. He’s open and honest, even when it risks his corporate bottom line. That’s pretty refreshing.

  5. Pat,
    you are right that Christians have a right to speak their mind, but people who oppose what these so-called Christians are saying also are entitled to speak their minds and keep their wallets closed.

  6. I am forced to contribute to an entity which forces a lot of things I don’t agree with on me and others. It is called Taxes. First amendment guarantees everyone the right to lawfully protest, including Christians, not just just ethnic or differently oriented or disoriented sexual groups.
    Hooray for Chick Fillet and anyone else who has the rocks to speak up however politically incorrect their view. They also have the right to be heard.

  7. raf,

    This guy is so far out of his league that I almost feel sorry for him.

    BTW … thanks for the voter fraud column. Shinning the bright light into the darkness is something you do very well.

  8. Blouise, I’m terribly sorry. I didn’t know you were appointed the Bigot Sheriff. Were you appointed by God or is your office temporal? Does it pay well? What’s your jurisdiction? Does it just cover gay issues? Do you have a full belt of bigot bullets or just one like Barney Fife? I’m fascinated because I worked in law enforcement my entire adult life and never met a true Bigot Sheriff. Like all of us, I’ve run into holier than thou, self appointed blowhards who fashion themselves Bigot Sheriffs. But you seem to be the real freakin’ deal. Can I get an autographed picture?

  9. nick spinelli,

    Ooo … I do so love a self righteous lecture that is so intent on redefining the term bigot that the entire point is missed.

    I’m talking politics here and how to get the anti-homosexual bigot vote off the couch and to the polls while still affording him/her the veneer of Christian cover.

    In 2004 it was placing referenda to ban gay marriage on the ballot in 11 states, including four of the “battleground” states. (they were riding the wave of anti-gay backlash after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the “sodomy” laws that made gay sex illegal.)

    In 2008 it was to find, equip, energize and connect African American spokespeople for marriage, develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right. (And Prop 8 in Calif, backed mainly by the Mormon Church)

    In 2010 adoption by gay couples took center stage coupled strangely enough with anti-Wicca verbiage.

    Your post is a perfect example of wedge-driving between blacks and the LGBT movement in the “civil rights” arena. Whoever told you blacks can’t be bigots?

    I’m not trying to change the hearts and minds of anybody … I’m simply identifying them as the bigots they are and noting the tactic used this time around to get them off their couch and to the polls. A chicken for cryin’ out loud … it’s so, I don’t know, fitting

  10. Otteray Scribe said:

    “I am attracted to 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air automobiles, but I don’t think I would care to marry one.”

    That’s probably a wise tact, O.S., since one longing glance at a passing Mustang, and there’d be internal combustion hell to pay.

  11. David,
    I agree that if I buy from any company that discriminates or donates money to causes that discriminate, that some of my money does aid the cause that I object to. The problem is finding out about those “corporate” policies and exercising your right to not shop there. I do believe that Mr. Cathay has the right to exercise his Freedom of Speech, but it does work both ways. There is also a difference of degree in some of the counter examples given. Mespo, just because someone’s religion is different than mine, is not a reason to boycott it. However, when that person is using corporate money to push their non-business agenda, I have the right to use my economic hammer as well.

  12. bettykath, his ornaments have decorated White House Christmas trees. My daughter particularly likes his pepper shaped ornaments. Most of Judson’s Christmas ornaments are pretty big and range from baseball to softball size. You should see them when they are back-lighted in a darkened room.

  13. Blouise,

    Glad you mentioned the bigot activation. Was waiting for it to be named. It is all politics now until election time.

  14. Nal: “When a person purchases products from a company with an advocacy agenda, that person is helping to support, even in a minor way, that agenda. A minuscule contribution is still a contribution.”

    I see. So if I buy a G.E. Toaster, I’m supporting a company that helps create and distribute thermonuclear weapons which are designed to target civilians including children.

    Buying a G.E. Toaster makes me an advocate of burning children?

    Thanks for clearing that up Nal.

  15. Blouise, You do understand that one of the largest demographics opposing gay marriage is blue collar black families. Many of those “bigots” who oppose gay marriage voted for Obama because he was a “bigot” also in 2008. President Obama made a political decision to support gay marrtiage just this year and his pollsters are pooping their pants worrying how many of those “bigots” he will lose by not showing up to vote.

    You will not change peoples hearts or minds by calling them bigots just because they’re a few months behind evolving like our prez. I’m a boomer, born in 1952. Our children are leading the way on this..not people who shoot from the hip w/ “bigot” bullets like yourself. Kids born in our children’s generation don’t get angry about this. Their attitude is, “What’s the big freakn’ deal?” Some things take time. You do realize that just 10-15 years ago the gay community scoffed @ marriage. That was for straights, They embraced their alternative lifestyle, demanding some rights that the vast majority of people are down w/, via civil unions. But in the last decade, almost out of nowhere, gay marriage became the holy grail. Some of my gay friends tell me there is ENORMOUS pressure to toe the party line on that. A question that puzzles this “bigot”, and nobody has been able to answer, is why the sudden paradigm shift? More divorces and billable hours maybe?

  16. OS, If I weren’t trying very seriously to get rid of “stuff” I’d lobby to get on your Christmas gift list. : ) The glassware is absolutely gorgeous.

Comments are closed.