Chick-fil-A Pledges to Stop Funding Anti-Gay Groups

After igniting a national uproar over corporate opposition to gay marriage, the fast food chain has committed to stop funding antigay groups.

Following a national furor over the Chick-fil-A corporation’s financial support for antigay groups, the company pledged today to stop giving money to such groups.

According the Los Angeles Times, a gay and lesbian advocacy group called The Civil Rights Agenda announced that the fast food company met with them and agreed to cease donations to groups such as Focus on the Family and the National Organization for Marriage.

Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy sparked the controversy over gay marriage and the role of companies and consumers in social movements in July when he told the Baptist Press:

"We are very much supportive of the family—the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that ... we know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."

He further drew the ire of gay rights advocates when he said in a radio interview on the The Ken Coleman Show:

"I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,' and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is about.”

According to Equality Matters, a gay, lesbian and transgender rights group, Chick-fil-A donated nearly $5 million to groups that lobby against gay marriage from 2003 to 2010.

In Orange County, residents were quick to come out in favor or against the company’s stance on gay marriage by staging protests at Chick-Fil-A, route: {:controller=>"articles", :action=>"show", :id=>"watch-same-sex-marriage-debate-hits-the-deep-fryer-in-laguna-hills"} --> locations or spending money at the restaurant on

Kathi September 22, 2012 at 01:03 AM
I believe they have revised some of their earlier books. But it seems that most people are reacting out of ignorance of what they do now. I happen to catch them on the radio frequently & its always helpful info basically on various types of interpersonal relationships, especially in family settings. People often bring their own prior assumptions into relationships without even realizing that they are operating on different assumptions. Of course that can greatly hinder communications so they bring those things out into the open to help couples to recognize & deal w them, among other things. & while each program may be aimed at a particular type of audience, a lot of it can apply generally. They have a lot of guests w experience & expertise in all sorts of situations. One thing that they have been encouraging is adoption & not just of babies but also of the many older children needing a loving home. & they have discussed the challenges that can bring w helpful advice for dealing w it. They are on KWVE 107.9 M-F at 6 or 6:30 pm & other stations as well. I think a lot of people would be surprised to listen to them.
Kathi September 22, 2012 at 01:08 AM
Well, I'm still not saying that he lied. Rather he heard what he wanted to hear. The later article acknowledged that it is not clear exactly what the statement meant which was mostly a reiteration of their existing policy although they did add anti-discrimination language to official corp policy, but what a lot of people that got all excited in the 1st place didn't realize is that they don't discriminate. It was all about viewpoint discrimination. & they supported what even Pres. Obama said he was for when he was running previously! Now all of a sudden that is considered terrible?
Kathi September 22, 2012 at 01:15 AM
Dan Avery, You might want to actually read these studies. The issue that they found was that those in the so-call preponderance of evidence that they APA went by had serious methodological issues. The samples were NOT random. I believe most were volunteers which right off the bat can skew results. Also they were small samples that tended to be higher income people. & in addition, most of the prior researchers had an axe to grind--they were out to demonstrate that there is no difference, rather than neutrally studying to see if there are differences. I think any unbiased person can see that if you have researchers using self-selected samples where both the researcher & probably the sample subjects have an interest in showing a particular result, that the results obtained may not be truly representative of a wider population.
Myna B September 22, 2012 at 01:58 AM
How about getting a food review on Chick-fil-A to see how long they may stay in business in So.Cal? These days, if a fast food chain doesn't respond to it's customer's feedback, they get replaced by those who do. I'd rather go to Wendy's than Chick-fil-A when I want a chicken sandwitch.
Rich Kane September 22, 2012 at 02:55 AM
I actually penned a food review of the first Chick-fil-A that ever opened in OC, the one in Irvine, back in 2004 ...


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »