Chick-fil-a Support Day and Free Speech

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

If this were true, why didn't we get buses going to Disneyland when the SBC and CL boycotted Disney?

This seems pretty cut-and-dried - Occam's Razor should trump your natural skepticism.

I'm not sure I follow your analogy. I've considered a couple of ways it could work, but I'm not sure what you intend.

The way I understand things, the Disney boycott was a huge failure. So while nobody set up a date for everyone to arrive and show their Disney love, over the course of the years, people did.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I'm not sure I follow your analogy. I've considered a couple of ways it could work, but I'm not sure what you intend.

The way I understand things, the Disney boycott was a huge failure. So while nobody set up a date for everyone to arrive and show their Disney love, over the course of the years, people did.

You're claiming that this "CFA Day" is stocked with a pile of people who don't care about the religion, but instead care about the free speech element (to the extent it exists, which I think it doesn't).

However, there are literally zero other wide-scale boycotts that received the same "free speech" backlash/support for the boycotted company, including ones against companies (like Disney) that were primarily based in related issues (Disney's boycott was based on a movie - seems clearly free speech - and giving rights to gay employees).

The success of the original boycott is irrelevant (and it feels like you're being intentionally obtuse even bringing that up) - unless you're somehow claiming people would have done the same thing had Disney suffered? That seems wildly unsupportable - this was a complete organized "un-boycott" by religious organizations.

Occam's Razor says this was a religion thing - not a "free speech" thing (which barely even applies).

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

You're claiming that this "CFA Day" is stocked with a pile of people who don't care about the religion, but instead care about the free speech element (to the extent it exists, which I think it doesn't).

However, there are literally zero other wide-scale boycotts that received the same "free speech" backlash/support for the boycotted company, including ones against companies (like Disney) that were primarily based in related issues (Disney's boycott was based on a movie - seems clearly free speech - and giving rights to gay employees).

The success of the original boycott is irrelevant (and it feels like you're being intentionally obtuse even bringing that up) - unless you're somehow claiming people would have done the same thing had Disney suffered? That seems wildly unsupportable - this was a complete organized "un-boycott" by religious organizations.

Occam's Razor says this was a religion thing - not a "free speech" thing (which barely even applies).

I think you are mistaking my position considerably.

I think people showed up yesterday because they had the perception that a company they have positive feelings about was under attack. Many of the folks who showed up share Dan Cathy's attitude about marriage, no doubt, but I think some others did respond to the bluster in the media about stores not being welcome in certain areas and their concern that people were no longer going to be feel able to express support for traditional marriage.

I don't actually think Dan Cathy's freedom of speech was ever in question. You're not guaranteed freedom from the social or economic consequences your speech.

I think pulling out a boycott from 1996-1997 and suggesting that a failure to act a certain way then demonstrates the simplest explanation for behavior this week is weird. Particularly when you think about that era producing the Defense of Marriage act, etc. I'm not sure the attitudes then indicate that much about people's present positions and attitudes.

I already recognize what follows is unusually stupid. I have clarified a little a couple of posts down

ETA: I'm asking this sincerely because I'm trying to think of one, can you think of any other publicized boycotts since the invention and widespread use of social media? Can you think of one when anyone attempted to play the Huckabee role of naming a date for a counter protest?

I also think that Chick-fil-a customers may identify with the brand more that the companies involved with other boycotts. No doubt their perception of the company as having Christian values probably feeds that.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I think you are mistaking my position considerably.

I think people showed up yesterday because they had the perception that a company they have positive feelings about was under attack. Many of the folks who showed up share Dan Cathy's attitude about marriage, no doubt, but I think some others did respond to the bluster in the media about stores not being welcome in certain areas and their concern that people were no longer going to be feel able to express support for traditional marriage.

I don't actually think Dan Cathy's freedom of speech was ever in question. You're not guaranteed freedom from the social or economic consequences your speech.

I think pulling out a boycott from 1996-1997 and suggesting that a failure to act a certain way then demonstrates the simplest explanation for behavior this week is weird. Particularly when you think about that era producing the Defense of Marriage act, etc. I'm not sure the attitudes then indicate that much about people's present positions and attitudes.

ETA: I'm asking this sincerely because I'm trying to think of one, can you think of any other publicized boycotts since the invention and widespread use of social media? Can you think of one when anyone attempted to play the Huckabee role of naming a date for a counter protest?

I also think that Chick-fil-a customers may identify with the brand more that the companies involved with other boycotts. No doubt their perception of the company as having Christian values probably feeds that.

Are you really asking if there have been any boycotts since the invention of social media?

Look up One Million Moms and check out the long list of companies they have boycotted including, most recently, Amazon for supporting same sex marriage.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Are you really asking if there have been any boycotts since the invention of social media?

Look up One Million Moms and check out the long list of companies they have boycotted including, most recently, Amazon for supporting same sex marriage.

Thanks for asking instead of just assuming that I'd lost my mind.

No, I guess what I'm really asking is have their been any boycotts that anybody cared about? [ETA: okay, I expressed that really badly. I know the people involved in the boycotts care, but I can't think of any that clogged up my facebook feed.]

What seems different about this to me is that it was a facebook sensation and that someone gave people two distinct protests with dates.

If the issue is all about religion, then those other boycotts should have blown up as well, but they didn't. [EATA: I'm just trying to think about why this was different. Is it that everyone loves a culture war in an election year?]

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Thanks for asking instead of just assuming that I'd lost my mind.

No, I guess what I'm really asking is have their been any boycotts that anybody cared about? [ETA: okay, I expressed that really badly. I know the people involved in the boycotts care, but I can't think of any that clogged up my facebook feed.]

Yeah ... if this is the (even de facto) standard you're using, we're going to be at a loss to respond, because ... well, it's sort of nonsense to use "your facebook feed" or whatever, but it's also beyond subjective, and isn't really something to respond to.

And again - if this one is so different ... why? Is it really because a mayor blustered, or because it's [perceived as] an attack on traditional Christian values that took major root (particularly in social media), leading to a backlash from traditional sources (Huckabee)? Which one really makes more sense? Clearly the latter, right?

This thread leads you to the answer - even those trying to couch their reasons for going to "CFA Day" in anything but Christian values can't help but come back to those values!

If the issue is all about religion, then those other boycotts should have blown up as well, but they didn't. [EATA: I'm just trying to think about why this was different. Is it that everyone loves a culture war in an election year?]

I think you have this EXACTLY reversed - this blew up in part BECAUSE it's a perceived attack on Christian values (and, of course, because it's an election year, among dozens of other effects) - that's why there was a "second date" set. I think you're mistaking causes and effects.

Sometimes a pipe is indeed just a pipe - even if your Facebook feed claims otherwise.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I think you have this EXACTLY reversed - this blew up in part BECAUSE it's a perceived attack on Christian values (and, of course, because it's an election year, among dozens of other effects) - that's why there was a "second date" set. I think you're mistaking causes and effects.

I think we're missing each other here. Please break down your version of causes and effects because I'm not getting how they are all that different than mine.

Here's how I understand it.

1. Dan Cathy spouts off to a Baptist website.
2. Same-sex marriage advocates expose Cathy's remarks and use them to remind people of Chick-fil-a continued relationship with groups opposed to same-sex marriage rights and renew calls for boycott.
3. A couple of politicians make perhaps ill considered statements about blocking Chick-fil-a expansion in new markets based on the corporations beliefs about same-sex marriage.
4. Chick-fil-a fans don't like the reaction.
5. Huckabee suggests Chick-fil-a appreciation day.
6. Same sex marriage advocates suggest the Kiss In in addition to the boycott as a public response to August 1st.
7. 8/1 Chick-fil-a customers come out in droves to support CFA because they feel it's under attack.
8. We'll see what happens tomorrow

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Thanks for asking instead of just assuming that I'd lost my mind.

No, I guess what I'm really asking is have their been any boycotts that anybody cared about? [ETA: okay, I expressed that really badly. I know the people involved in the boycotts care, but I can't think of any that clogged up my facebook feed.]

What seems different about this to me is that it was a facebook sensation and that someone gave people two distinct protests with dates.

If the issue is all about religion, then those other boycotts should have blown up as well, but they didn't. [EATA: I'm just trying to think about why this was different. Is it that everyone loves a culture war in an election year?]

You should have checked out Starbucks' Facebook page the week they announced their support of the equal marriage law in our state. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people from all over the country - but most not from our state - ranting about how they would no longer go to Starbucks. Starbucks loyals - and new customers who were drawn in because of Starbucks' official position - responded by saying they would shop at Starbucks more than ever.

Starbucks was the subject of controversy again when they announced that customers in our state (and in other states where it's legal) are welcome to open carry firearms in their stores. Some people freaked out and told Starbucks they wouldn't go into their stores as long as they allowed guns, but gun activists organized a day for people to go to Starbucks with their guns. And since then, the gun rights lobby has produced t-shirts, patches, stickers, etc. with the Starbucks mermaid logo and statements like "I love guns & coffee." My husband has one.

For what it's worth, I only heard about the CFA stuff on news sites. We don't have any CFA in Washington, in fact there are only a handful on the whole west coast. So I do kinda wonder if the people at the CFA Day were basically just preaching to the choir. It doesn't surprise me that people in the south and midwest rallied for what they feel is a conservative, religious cause.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

You should have checked out Starbucks' Facebook page the week they announced their support of the equal marriage law in our state. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people from all over the country - but most not from our state - ranting about how they would no longer go to Starbucks. Starbucks loyals - and new customers who were drawn in because of Starbucks' official position - responded by saying they would shop at Starbucks more than ever.

Starbucks was the subject of controversy again when they announced that customers in our state (and in other states where it's legal) are welcome to open carry firearms in their stores. Some people freaked out and told Starbucks they wouldn't go into their stores as long as they allowed guns, but gun activists organized a day for people to go to Starbucks with their guns. And since then, the gun rights lobby has produced t-shirts, patches, stickers, etc. with the Starbucks mermaid logo and statements like "I love guns & coffee." My husband has one.

For what it's worth, I only heard about the CFA stuff on news sites. We don't have any CFA in Washington, in fact there are only a handful on the whole west coast. So I do kinda wonder if the people at the CFA Day were basically just preaching to the choir. It doesn't surprise me that people in the south and midwest rallied for what they feel is a conservative, religious cause.

Did you see a lot of people linking or posting Starbucks stuff during those events or mainly just see it on the corporate page? I read blog stuff about open carry, but not specifically about boycotts, etc. And while you don't have Chick-fil-a, we have a ton of Starbucks and gun-lovers and Christian conservatives. It would be sort of interesting to know if or how much geography relative to the corporate office plays with boycotts or brand support.

I think 95% or more of the people who went to CFA Wednesday are people who routinely go to CFA. There were a few people mentioned in articles that I read from states where Chick-fil-a is uncommon or non-existent who drove a couple of hours to go to one, but not only do I agree with your preaching to the choir assessment, I think it was generally the local choir.

One of the little blubs that I thought was interesting was a detail from the brand approval reports in the wake of Dan Cathy's comments. For the week after the comments or something like that, brand approval actually went up in the midwest but not in the south. I thought it was kind of odd, not that I expected it to be up in the south but that it went up anyplace.