Posted on 01/30/2011 8:53:18 AM PST by scottjewell
This is in part because I took note of this part of the article (and some gay advocates are now posting that Chick-Fil-A will henceforth support “Marriage Equality”):
what is to be made of this?:
Chick-Fil-A President Dan Cathy says the company is dropping its support for anti-gay marriage groups.
The announcement comes after gay website GoodAsYou.org blogged about the chicken restaurant’s sponsorship of a marriage seminar closely associated with the anti-gay marriage group Pennsylvania Family Institute.
In a two-minute-twenty-seven-second video message released nearly three weeks ago, Cathy denied that the company’s donation was an endorsement of its values.
“Let me be clear, Chick-Fil-A serves all people and values all people,” Cathy said.
“Providing food to these events, or any event, is not an endorsement of the mission, political stance or motives of this or any other organization. Any suggestion otherwise is just inaccurate,” he added.
So how should they do it to meet with your approval?
In a two-minute-twenty-seven-second video message released nearly three weeks ago, Cathy denied that the company’s donation was an endorsement of its values.
“Let me be clear, Chick-Fil-A serves all people and values all people,” Cathy said.
“Providing food to these events, or any event, is not an endorsement of the mission, political stance or motives of this or any other organization. Any suggestion otherwise is just inaccurate,” he added.
This was where the author got his title from. In the above.
You are still repeating their interpretation.
I posted what Dan Cathy actually said in post #32.
I agree don-o, I have asked the mods to add something like that to the title.
So they falsely attributed a quote to Cathy. That is not an interpretation, that is false quoting of a source.
And even in this article, one is led to believe that Chick-Fil-A is capitulating, or trying to appear neutral. Neutrality is not a sign of affiliation or endorsement. And which articles can one trust, I wonder?
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20110106/family-group-gay-blog-gives-misleading-information-about-chick-fil-a-co-sponsorship/
In other words, they shy away from any political connotation, which is what gay advocates would like. If there is no endorsement, so be it. But that seems shadowy and odd to me. And it is being said that Chick-Fil-A may be on the side of marriage equality. Untrue, but they leave themselves open to that assumption on the part of some.
The title is either a mistaken interpretation or an outright lie.
Either one, I hope it will be fixed.
Sad to see when a corporation compromises on its values. Will be being closed on Sunday’s be the next to go?
All I see in that article is someone explaining that it was not CFA corporate that gave the food it was the individual franchise owners in PA. As I explained above, the corporation allows the individual franchise owners freedom to support local events.
What does this have to do with anything?
They did not compromise anything.
You missed the rest of the thread. This article is by a pro-gay organization and the title is a lie. What Cathy actually said is in post #32.
He has never backed down on his stance on traditional marriage, nor has the corporation told franchises to stop supporting pro-traditional-marriage entities.
To my thinking, it has to do with the vagueness on where organizations actually stand on gay marriage, either firmly pro or contra.
It is not an unreasonable conclusion to assume an organization like Chick-Fil-A would be following suit with many who are part, for instance, of this movement below. What is evolving is the belief that Christians must not discriminate against gay marriage: And this view is endorsed by the Christians themselves:
A group that seeks to reverse the bad image of Christianity in America launched a new campaign Tuesday that encourages Christians to publicly confess their shortcomings by leaving notes in public places and reporting them on a website.
The My Confession campaign, organized by Changing the Face of Christianity, Inc., hopes to get Christians to acknowledge problems such as hidden hypocrisy, intolerance and homophobia – failings that give the faith a bad name.
“We are trying to help Christians actually change for the better. This begins by acknowledging we have a problem through heartfelt confession,” explained R. Brad White, founder of Changing the Face of Christianity.
White is a former atheist who is now a devout Christian. He says his mission in life is to help reverse Christian intolerance and restore the true message of Jesus Christ among those who carry his name.
The CFC founder shared his confession about being a “homophobic Christian.”
“My confession is I’ve allowed my religious convictions to make me numb to the human rights of gays and lesbians,” confessed White. “I haven’t consciously fought against gay marriage, but I’ve allowed outspoken Christian political activists to limit the human rights of LGBTs and let them speak for me through my silence,”
“My confession is I’ve been a homophobic Christian. The gay community deserves love, not discrimination,” he said.
and the rest is here:
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20110126/my-confession-campaign-aims-to-reverse-christianitys-bad-image/
Ergo, it is not unreasonable to presume that the liberal publication was being accurate. I thought perhaps over-stated, but not totally fallacious.
Again - your OPINION.
Here is what Dan Cathy said, "While my family and I believe in the Biblical definition of marriage, we love and respect anyone who disagrees." How is that vague? He believes in the Biblical definition of marriage.
He also says: "At the same time, we will continue to offer resources to strengthen marriages and families. To do anything different would be inconsistent with our purpose and belief in Biblical principles."
Sounds pretty straightforward to me.
The rest of your argument is ludicrous! Just because some obscure "Christian" organization out there is "vague" about homosexuality being right or wrong - does not mean other Christians or Christian groups believe this way!
By that same argument you just assumed every Christian on FR of being soft on gays too. I hope you have on a flame-proof suit.
So why exactly are you on FR defending a PRO GAY article that is spreading misinformation about a conservative family-owned business?
How am I defending a pro-gay article? That is your assumption, and why would I need a flame-proof suit? I base my opinion on many months of observation of a softening stance regarding gay marriage, on the part of Republicans and Christians (obviously some, not all, but a considerable number). This is more or less obvious, and it is not exactly a good thing, or something I am pleased with. But why exactly have I now become suspect? I may have been careless in presuming, too quickly, the accuracy of an article. The rest I stand by, without reservation.
No, I did not assume ALL; I assumed a minority, but a significant minority , was “softening “ their stance. Culturally, socially, that is worrisome.
You absolutely have been defending both the authors of article as well as your reason for trusting it. You tried to lay the blame clearly on Dan Cathy and CFA by posting articles and making arguments that weren’t even supported by those articles. You still refuse to acknowledge what Cathy himself said on the issue.
Your “months of observation” of some groups going soft is NO excuse for promoting lies about decent people and a good company. You continued to do this despite being shown you were wrong.
NOW we find out, oh, this is just your feeling about the whole thing. That since some Christian groups are going soft on homosexuality, then this other Christian group must be.
Truett Cathy has spent his entire life supporting marriages and families with his own time and money, his son is doing the same. They have Winshape which is a marriage retreat center, they have Winshape Homes which is a group home for troubled youth. They have been true to their faith this entire time and nothing has changed.
“We will continue to offer resources to strengthen marriages and families. To do anything different would be inconsistent with our purpose and belief in Biblical principles.” - Dan Cathy
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.