Chicago alderman: Chick-fil-A promised me in writing they’ll stop giving to anti-gay-marriage groups

posted at 9:39 pm on September 19, 2012 by Allahpundit

I’d like to think they took my advice and made a totally empty promise knowing that there’s not much he can do to punish them if they break it. But I don’t. I assume this is on the level, and further assume that it’s a business decision driven not so much by their desire to open a new franchise in Chicago as their desire to forfeit their status as a national political lightning rod.

Still depressing to see them cave, though, and I say that as someone who supports gay marriage. Letting this cretin bully them into withholding money from their favorite political causes as a condition of doing business sets a terrible precedent. But oh well. Note to red-staters: Feel free to start making zoning permits contingent on local liberal business-owners taking a solemn vow not to give money to the left anymore.

As a result of the negotiations, Mr. Moreno received a letter signed by John E. Featherston Jr., a senior director of real estate for Chick-fil-A, stating, “The WinShape Foundations is now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas.”

Mr. Moreno said in an interview Wednesday that he believes the company will stop “using money to fund groups that have antigay causes. They have committed in writing they will not do that.”

He said company executives showed him records of its charitable giving for the year that does not include groups such as Focus on the Family, Exodus International or other groups that oppose marriage equality or have fought against the expansion of gay rights…

Chick-fil-A, which has more than $4 billion in annual sales, issued a statement on Wednesday that echoed one it produced in July, saying that “going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”

Between 2008 and 2010, Chick-fil-A’s foundation gave more than $3 million to groups opposed to same-sex marriage. Denying someone a permit due to his opinions is blatant viewpoint discrimination and violates the First Amendment, but as I said, I think Chick-fil-A simply wants off this political merry-go-round. If they sued, they’d probably win, but it might take years to resolve and in the meantime they’d be on the hot seat every time a new skirmish over SSM broke out. I think they just want to be done with this. If the Cathy family wants to continue to donate to social conservative groups, they’ll find another outlet than the WinShape Foundation.

Exit question: Where do you suppose Moreno comes down on this issue?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

In recent years, concerns about bullying have garnered national attention. But when you look behind the curtain at what is driving this nationwide dialogue, you find out that the groups that are pushing the “anti-bullying” campaigns are the same organizations working to redefine marriage and to force cultural acceptance and affirmation of homosexual lifestyles.

Of course.

triple on September 20, 2012 at 3:36 AM

Meh. If this is true, it proves Chik Fil-A are typical corporate cowards.

But I don’t eat fast food garbage anyway, so they aren’t exactly losing my business over this. Hell, I didn’t even eat there on the support day.

DRayRaven on September 20, 2012 at 5:16 AM

Meh. If this is true, it proves Chik Fil-A are typical corporate cowards.

But I don’t eat fast food garbage anyway, so they aren’t exactly losing my business over this. Hell, I didn’t even eat there on the support day.

DRayRaven on September 20, 2012 at 5:16 AM

One – IT’S NOT FAST FOOD GARBAGE! Everything is made fresh from scratch.

TWO -NO ONE HAS CAVED!

kara26 on September 20, 2012 at 5:48 AM

Mark of the beast, man. Mark of the beast. That none could buy or sell unless he took the mark. It is happening, and you are seeing it happen.

Dirty Creature on September 20, 2012 at 7:03 AM

Still depressing to see them cave, though, and I say that as someone who supports gay marriage. Letting this cretin bully them into withholding money from their favorite political causes as a condition of doing business sets a terrible precedent.

Yup , same here , I’m not bothered about gay marriage , but the nazi tactics should be fought.

This is about freedom of speech.

That’s where a lot of their support came from.

If chick-fil-a surrenders on this they’re not worth spit.

the_nile on September 20, 2012 at 7:15 AM

kara26 on September 20, 2012 at 5:48 AM

Meh, whatever. It’s still deep-fried chain-restaurant food. No, thanks.

DRayRaven on September 20, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Seems to me that the statement of not giving to political agendas might not include organizations that have a religious argument against gay marriage and that Chic-Fil-A can continue supporting these organizations. I think the alderman just read what he wanted to read and realized keeping Chic-Fil-A out of his district was a losing proposition. This way he can pretend to save face.

Fun_jumper on September 20, 2012 at 8:10 AM

There is only one proper response to the Chicago alderman’s refusal to grant a permit– and that is to sue. Tell them it is none of their damn business who you support politically or otherwise. Go jihadi on their you know what!.

You don’t reward illegal demands by laying down and rolling over. Do you think this now encourages other liberal permit grantors to follow Chicago’s example? CFA is extremely profitable. Can Chicago mean so much to them that they would stab the hundreds of thousands in the back who gave them the largest sales day for chicken in history? You complain about how America has declined, but then cave when the heat gets a little hot. Short sighted to say the least.

Count me out as a future customer.

gajaw999 on September 20, 2012 at 8:17 AM

Gays can have whatever relationship they want to have but just don’t call it marriage and don’t ask Christians to bless it by calling it marriage. Call it something else and quit poking the God I believe in, in His eyes. Their sin is no worse than mine but they see it not as a sin but as a lifestyle. Would it be ok if a married friend of yours was a serial womanizer, like bill clinton. Wink wink. Would it bother ya.

crosshugger on September 20, 2012 at 8:43 AM

The biggest irony about this is that Moreno is pushing “marriage equality” and the state of Illinois does not recognize gay marriage. They only recognize civil unions.

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at 9:03 AM

If the company executives don’t actually mean what they are promising then that makes them dishonest. They would have been wiser to cancel the franchise in that city.

Rose on September 19, 2012 at 11:20 PM

Sorry but I don’t see where they said any such thing. And why should they cancel a franchise because of some idiot? Isn’t that the real caving in? Some small business owner loses and people who could have had jobs lose. If I were CFA I would point that out, maybe they will. This has to be a decision not just by the execs but by the new franchise owner too.

Deanna on September 20, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Oh, is bullying a problem?

Maybe groups that CFA donated to (Focus on the Family) shouldn’t advocate against anti-bullying legislation, then.

They advocate against “anti-bullying” because the agenda is used in just this way against people who disagree.

Bullying crusades by the LGBT groups would actually mean something if they acknowledged that ALL kids are bullied and not just their precious group or they didn’t repeat the damn myth that their is an epidemic of LGBT kids killing themselves anymore than straight kids are.. The bullying crusade is a way to shut down those who disagree with the lifestyle or gay marriage by saying “look haters you are bullying teens by having that stance so SHUT UP, and these poor, poor teens have killed themselves because of it.”

http://www.livescience.com/8734-gay-teen-suicide-epidemic.html

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at 9:08 AM

After my last post this came to mind…it could be it’s the new franchisee who is having second thoughts about this. He/she would be the one getting the flak from the alderman, not so much CFA. That would make more sense to me, and CFA has to honor that decision by the possible franchisee. Or maybe they are getting resistance from the property sellers or owners and there isn’t much they can do about that. Or they could still be negotiating and don’t want to say anything definite yet. All in all I think this is all BS from the alderman…in more ways than one.

Deanna on September 20, 2012 at 9:11 AM

So we can’t even agree that bullying gay kids is wrong?

I get that you “disagree” with their sexual orientation, that doesn’t give you the right to bully them and make their lives a living hell.

triple on September 20, 2012 at 9:12 AM

In recent years, concerns about bullying have garnered national attention. But when you look behind the curtain at what is driving this nationwide dialogue, you find out that the groups that are pushing the “anti-bullying” campaigns are the same organizations working to redefine marriage and to force cultural acceptance and affirmation of homosexual lifestyles.

Of course.

triple on September 20, 2012 at 3:36 AM

Says the radical gay rights supporter who threatens other commenters here.

Hypocrite, of course.

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 9:17 AM

So we can’t even agree that bullying gay kids is wrong?

I get that you “disagree” with their sexual orientation, that doesn’t give you the right to bully them and make their lives a living hell.

triple on September 20, 2012 at 9:12 AM

You’re obtuse. It is the CAMPAIGN that is using the “bullying of teen kids as a weapon to shut down people who disagree with them.” And thank you- you just proved my point by assuming that I must bully gay kids..

BTW, I have never bullied a gay kid in my life. And congrats you are now the fourth gay marriage supporter who has accused me of it. In fact, my son had a friend who came out in 5th grade and my son was one of his ONLY friends that remained supportive. You don’t know me or anything about me. I abhor any campaign that shuts down free speech. Just like abhorring the campaign against the Mohummed movies maker does not mean I support him-get it?

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at 9:17 AM

triple on September 20, 2012 at 9:12 AM

It’s not just gay kids that get bullied, genius. I knew some gay kids in HS back in 1976. They didn;t get bullied. We had a strong theater and music department and they lent their talents there. Both girls and guys though the world of them, because they were outgoing and had great senses of humor.

All kids get bullied at one time or another. I was small and sickly, being asthmatic, but I dealt with it myself and became stronger for it.

Yes. Bullying is wrong. However, government intervention is not needed, nor will it solve the issue.

kingsjester on September 20, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Mark of the beast, man. Mark of the beast. That none could buy or sell unless he took the mark. It is happening, and you are seeing it happen.
Dirty Creature on September 20, 2012 at 7:03 AM

Yep. Just ask the owners of the privately owned Wildflower Inn in Vermont. Now, not only did it cost them $30000 but they can no longer hold actual wedding receptions.

Or the Greenwich Village Asian restaurant that was sued a couple days ago for not wanting to cater a homosexual ‘wedding reception’.

Or the photographer in New Mexico that has lost her 3rd appeal against the fine of almost $7000 for refusing to photograph a homosexual union ceremony.

And there are more…

So way to go, Allahpundit! Are you proud of your support for the destruction of the First Amendment? Because government sanctioned Homosexual ‘Marriage’ and Freedom of Religion are mutually exclusive, as can be seen from these cases, and even some homosexual activists have admitted. It was the FIRST Amendment for a reason.

And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

pannw on September 20, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Haven’t read all the comments – waay too many – so this may be redundant. I seem to recall that a contract that is coerced, not signed completely voluntarily, is not valid in law. This “agreement” seems to have been coerced. So these folks can do whatever they like with their money, “agreement” be damned. Not so?

Longhorn Six on September 20, 2012 at 9:55 AM

So way to go, Allahpundit! Are you proud of your support for the destruction of the First Amendment? Because government sanctioned Homosexual ‘Marriage’ and Freedom of Religion are mutually exclusive, as can be seen from these cases, and even some homosexual activists have admitted. It was the FIRST Amendment for a reason.
pannw on September 20, 2012 at 9:40 AM

A photographer, inn, and restaurant aren’t religious operations. The churches their owners belong to can exclude gays from membership.

dedalus on September 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM

A photographer, inn, and restaurant aren’t religious operations. The churches their owners belong to can exclude gays from membership.

dedalus on September 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM

So, you’re good with destroying lives of people who are otherwise fine people save for the fact they have a different code of morality than you?

What about an artist? If a Christian artist didn’t want to be commissioned to produce a piece of art extolling the virtues of a gay lifestyle, do they have a right to defer?

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM

So, you’re good with destroying lives of people who are otherwise fine people save for the fact they have a different code of morality than you?

What about an artist? If a Christian artist didn’t want to be commissioned to produce a piece of art extolling the virtues of a gay lifestyle, do they have a right to defer?

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Apparently that whole 1st amendment thingy only works if you are a church… And gee, I always thought it protected the individual./

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Apparently that whole 1st amendment thingy only works if you are a church… And gee, I always thought it protected the individual./

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at

pannw’s comment and the reply he got is the entire crux of the gay movement tactic of those who don’t comply. They intend to make people so afraid, by ridicule or fear of retribution through litigation, that they bend to the will of these people or become passive to the point of compliance.

Talk about bullying.

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 10:22 AM

pannw’s comment and the reply he got is the entire crux of the gay movement tactic of those who don’t comply. They intend to make people so afraid, by ridicule or fear of retribution through litigation, that they bend to the will of these people or become passive to the point of compliance.

Talk about bullying.

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 10:22 AM

I just want to know if there open-minded carries over to other “sexual preferences/orientations? Does that mean that an inn has to host a BDSM convention. Or a restaurant has to hold a wife-switching meeting or a meeting of polyamorous people. Or a photographer has to take photos at a NAMBLA convention. Or a cake baker has to make a cake for a brother/sister or polygamous commitment ceremony. When do businesses get to choose who their clientele will be? If sexual preferences/orientation is protected then ALL sexual preferences and orientation must be protected.

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at 10:27 AM

melle1228 on September 20, 2012 at 10:27 AM

You pretty much don’t have a choice now.

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Note to red-staters: Feel free to start making zoning permits contingent on local liberal business-owners taking a solemn vow not to give money to the left anymore.

^^^THIS^^^

Solaratov on September 20, 2012 at 12:21 PM

This is depressing, especially because libs are still going to boycott it.

Esthier on September 20, 2012 at 12:22 PM

This is what democracy looks like?

tom0508 on September 19, 2012 at 9:52 PM

It may well be.

But it certainly is not what a Constitutional Republic looks like.

Solaratov on September 20, 2012 at 12:35 PM

I heard that Chick Fil A got 30 pieces of silver for making this little adjustment to their donation policy.

Mormon Doc on September 19, 2012 at 11:35 PM

No you didn’t. You’re lying about that. You haven’t heard squat – but you just thought you’d throw some crap in the game…probably because you now see that the letter was carefully crafted – by very good lawyers – to mean…absolutely nothing.

So why did you feel it necessary to make that little ‘tidbit’ up? Or do you have a LINK that you’d care to share? [AS IF]

Solaratov on September 20, 2012 at 1:02 PM

This is depressing, especially because libs are still going to boycott it.

Esthier on September 20, 2012 at 12:22 PM

In his written word, he foretold us of these things. Nothing to make us depressed about at all. You’re one of my sisters in faith here and I look to your words too. You better buck up. :-)

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 1:03 PM

What about an artist? If a Christian artist didn’t want to be commissioned to produce a piece of art extolling the virtues of a gay lifestyle, do they have a right to defer?

hawkdriver on September 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Are they generally subject to anti-discrimination policy on these transactions? Artists can turn down a client based on age, religion, gender, etc. However, if the artist opened a gallery to the general public and decided to exclude a customer due to race or sexual orientation they’d be subject to the state law.

dedalus on September 20, 2012 at 4:39 PM

@dedalus.

Freedom of association died as a consequence of the civil rights act. The more protected classes of people we have, the more cases of “discrimination” there will be.

It’s a dangerous trend, and anyone who believes that religious institutions will continue to have the right to “discriminate” and won’t eventually be forced to accommodate gays, lesbians and whatever the next glorified sin-of-the-week is, is dreaming.

JannyMae on September 20, 2012 at 5:21 PM

JannyMae on September 20, 2012 at 5:21 PM

I agree with your first point. On the 2nd point the 1st Amendment has protected churches from ordaining women and various other equal opportunity legislation.

dedalus on September 20, 2012 at 5:30 PM

We’ll see….

JannyMae on September 20, 2012 at 6:31 PM

By the way, for all those who believed the liberal lies (yes, they lie regularly, but our side always seems surprised), here’s the real take on Chick-fil-A’s stance.

dominigan on September 20, 2012 at 10:32 PM

dominigan on September 20, 2012 at 10:32 PM

“For many months now, Chick-fil-A’s corporate giving has been mischaracterized,” executives said in today’s statement.

Sorry, but I simply don’t buy this explanation. Why did they sit around all that time allowing their corporate giving to be mischaracterized? Something is not right about this. I don’t believe that story any more than I believe Moreno’s.

JannyMae on September 21, 2012 at 12:42 AM

But I don’t eat fast food garbage anyway, so they aren’t exactly losing my business over this. Hell, I didn’t even eat there on the support day.

DRayRaven on September 20, 2012 at 5:16 AM

-
FYI their salads are great… Definitely NOT garbage. I never had one until the support day and now Tuesdays and Thursdays are Chick-fil-A salad day.
-
I don’t worry too much about boycotts, but this reversal worked out for me and them so it’s all good.
-

RalphyBoy on September 21, 2012 at 2:05 AM

Comment pages: 1 2