I'm sure most of you have heard of the Chic-fil-A controversy that has happened over the past month or so about the COO of the restaurant not supporting gay marriage.

If you haven't, here's the story. Dan Cathy, of Chick-fil-a said:

“We are very much supportive of the family â€" 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."

They also came to light of donations to anti-gay political organizations, including the Family Research Council.

This sparked huge controversy nationwide, many protests, and gay rights supporters also staged a same-sex "kiss day" at stores nationwide on August 4, among other things.

Now I must ask, what are your thoughts on this whole situation?

I kinda touched on the subject in the other homosexual thread but I'll go a little more in depth on this topic.

I believe that Dan Cathy has the right to speak his opinion just as much as Anthony Cooper or Jon Stewart has to voice his. If you look at Mr. Cathy's statement it was not hateful in the least. He was asked a question in an interview and he answered in what he felt was the best way possible for his stance on the question.  To hear the LGBT thumping and kicking and screaming about it is their right, but I hope they respect my right to think they are stupid for it.

The rhetoric I keep hearing from people is that, and I quote "This has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. The fact that he contributes to anti-gay political organizations makes it a human rights issue!"  Complete bollocks.

You see the 1st Amendment is a beautiful thing, but it can be a wench when it works against you.  I do not see a difference from this to the millions for the LGBT causes that are given by Ben & Jerry's, Amazon, or JC Penny's. Or even the millions given to Planned Parenthood (a little off topic but it just goes to prove a point.) Just because a business is pro-this or anti-that than it is your right to not patronize that said business but let's be realistic their is no difference either way.  To say otherwise is obnoxiously hypocritical.  As I prefer to look at both sides of an issue I did some research on the supposed funds the Cathy's/Chick-Fil-A donates too and what I found was interesting.  The funds were given for counseling of homosexuals to bring them to heterosexuality as well as for overseas missions to Uganda to "bring others to the light" among other things.  Among those funds were also millions in community building projects in Atlana as well other Christian orginizations.  During the Buycott on Wednesday many Chick-Fil-A employees brought water out to the boycotters so they wouldn't become dehydrated.

I don't base where I shop based on an owners stance on an issue.  I shop at places where I enjoy the services provided.  Regardless that I am a proponent for Pro-Life both the trousers and shirt that I'm wearing are from Target; and as a proponent of the 1st Amendment and a savage chicken sandwhich I ate at Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday.

Those claiming Human Rights look like a broad-sided ninny if you ask me.  Show me the argument that isn't a strawman and I'll listen.

The fact is that Chic-fil-A is a PRIVATE business, with PRIVATE owners. (private meaning that the Government does not own the business.) Which means that they are allowed to have an opinion on things. Just like a store run by a Christian owner is allowed to put out a nativity scene, and a store with a Jewish owner is allowed to put out a menorah during their respective holiday times. Is it bad for business? probably, but they are allowed to do it. In fact, chic-Fil-A has all the same rights to do that as another restaurant has the right to support the legalization of gay marriage, as well as the rights to donate money to pro- gay marriage legalization organizations.
But this also means that people have the right to PEACEFULLY protest Chic-Fil-A, (notice PEACEFULLY), and if it drives down business, then tough cookies.

The fact is that Chic-fil-A is a PRIVATE business, with PRIVATE owners. (private meaning that the Government does not own the business.) Which means that they are allowed to have an opinion on things. Just like a store run by a Christian owner is allowed to put out a nativity scene, and a store with a Jewish owner is allowed to put out a menorah during their respective holiday times. Is it bad for business? probably, but they are allowed to do it. In fact, chic-Fil-A has all the same rights to do that as another restaurant has the right to support the legalization of gay marriage, as well as the rights to donate money to pro- gay marriage legalization organizations.
But this also means that people have the right to PEACEFULLY protest Chic-Fil-A, (notice PEACEFULLY), and if it drives down business, then tough cookies.

I agree 100%. They're Christians who follow the word of the Bible. The fact that is has been THIS chaotic of an outburst just blows my mind. It's not like they're banning gays from their store or refusing to serve gays. Why are people outraged that a Christian agrees with the bible? Why is it only okay for someone to speak their mind about gay marriage if they agree with it? In my opinion, people are fighting for freedom and equality but the efforts are worthless. Freedom of speech is not only for those who believe in gay marriage but ALSO for those who don't.

i still eat Chic-Fil-A once or twice a week. I couldn't care less about what the CEO of the company I give money to thinks about marriage.

It's his money. He can choose to do whatever he wants with that money. If he wishes to support groups that are anti-gay, so be it. As long as he doesn't directly hurt others, who cares? He's not banning homosexuals from buying merchandise from him, he's not banning gays from the proximity of the store. He just simply doesn't support them.

What kind of logic is having freedom of speech, but it being controversial, or bad if you say something different than the general public says? Freedom of speech is either a person can say whatever he wants, whenever he wants without suffering any consequences from what he's saying. He has full right to that. Just because you disagree with what he says does not mean he's a bad person.

Freedom of speech is not freedom if you have ANY kind of boundaries set for you.

Reminds me of this. I don't think it's that serious, we are all entitled to our opinion; yes, even if we don't agree with them, they are still allowed to have an opinion. I'm not going to stop eating at a restaurant if I find out that the chef is gay, or is against gays. I don't care what their views are, I'm there for food.

I doubt there will be serious repercussions from this. They did lose a deal with the muppets, I think, for happy meal toys, and probably some of their customers too. But, they will also gain customers because they will come to support them in their decision to be against gay marriage. As for me, I don't really care for fast food, but I wouldn't care about the CEO's view on gay marriage.

I know a lot of people boycotting Chik-fil-A...

They need to realize that their supporting/not supporting gay marriage is an opinion. If I can say I'm for gay marriage, then someone else can say they are against it, and there isn't anything I can do about that. The CEO of a company is allowed to voice his opinion and do whatever he wants with his money. Whoever boycotts a company just because of the CEO's opinion is stupid. It's not going to change his opinion, so I don't know what they are trying to accomplish besides missing out on some awesome food.

The boycott isn't because the CEO has an opinion. It's because he is actively supporting anti-gay organizations. Those who go and buy food at Chick-Fil-A will have a portion of that money go to such a cause. So people who are in support of LGBT rights don't want to give someone money knowing it will go towards something they are against.