Fortezza, Umilitade, e Largo Core - Courage, Humility, and Largeness of Heart.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Torn over boycotting Chick-fil-A

I love the country we live in. I love the fact that my right to decent from the popular opinion is supported in our Constitution. I love that fact that I am able to vote with the power of my dollar by supporting organizations that I agree with philosophically. I also appreciate the fact that even those I disagree with are also able to vote with their dollar and support organizations they believe in. For example: I appreciate Home Depot. There are a lot of things that I don't agree with in regards to Home Depot: they support the Republican National Convention, they are blamed for driving the independent hardware store out of business. However, due to their size, they are able to help those in need when natural disaster strikes. They are also huge sponsors of the Georgia Aquarium. But returning to their support of the RNC- if I am able to support the political party of my choice, is it not fair that others are able to support the party of their choice? Home Depot is enacting an important right that we have in this country, one that we should not take for granted nor let atrophy.

So this leaves me torn. Which do I believe in more: our inherent right to support causes of our choice or the causes themselves? I do not like the idea of my money going, indirectly, to causes I am passionately against (such as homophobia). Yet, if I am to expect my right to support my causes, doesn't that mean that we should respect others' right to support their causes?

Chick-fil-A is getting a lot of attention recently. My liberal friends are calling for us all to boycott them. Once their views on marriage equality came to light, about a year ago, I significantly cut down on the business I gave them. I could give you a long, sob story as to why I did not cut them out cold turkey but it comes down to this: at least the revenue they received from me was markedly less.

Truth be told, this could be me justifying my continued patronizing of Chick-fil-A. Yet I am left with the question: if I want the freedom to support my causes, doesn't the reverse seem important? Chick-fil-A is engaging society, supporting causes they are passionate about, and inadvertently creating important dialogue. Does this call for an all-out boycott?
at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

5 comments:

  1. HannahJuly 23, 2012 at 5:40 PM

    I don't feel like I'm choosing between the two. I'm making the same choice as they are: using my money to support what I believe in. I fully acknowledge that they have the right to do the same. I also know conservatives who have increased their patronage because they DO agree with those causes...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clever CloverJuly 23, 2012 at 5:46 PM

      and NOM calling for boycotts inadvertently had the reverse effect for some companies. (ftw!)

      Delete
  2. UnknownJuly 23, 2012 at 5:54 PM

    1. Freedom of choice is not freedom from consequence.
    2. Freedom can be a cause, but a cause is not always freedom.

    Therefore, I find that I can support a cause (in this case by way of boycott) without taking anything away from CFA's freedom to choose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clever CloverJuly 23, 2012 at 6:01 PM

      perhaps the act of your boycotting is continuing the engagement they began (by financially supporting [...] cause)?

      Delete
  3. Clever CloverMarch 22, 2013 at 9:34 PM

    Shane Windmeyer, executive director of Campus Pride, on why he no longer calls for a boycott of Chick-fil-a. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shane-l-windmeyer/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a_b_2564379.html

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)