After an intense national debate about the anti-gay values and donations of the Chick-fil-A restaurant chain and weeks of speculation about a potentially new direction for the company, the Civil Rights Agenda, an Illinois-based LGBT rights organization, announced today in a press release that Chicago alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno, who has been an outspoken opponent of the restaurant chain’s potential expansion into his northwestern ward, has viewed an internal Chick-fil-A document pledging to treat all people equally regardless of sexual orientation. The Civil Rights Agenda worked closely with Moreno in an advisory capacity during his negotiations with Chick-fil-A and spoke directly with company executives to educate them about LGBT-related issues. Moreno also confirmed that Chick-fil-A will no longer donate to anti-LGBT organizations.
Anthony Martinez, executive director of the Civil Rights Agenda, said in the statement: “We are very pleased with this outcome and thank Alderman Moreno for his work on this issue. I think the most substantive part of this outcome is that Chick-fil-A has ceased donating to organizations that promote discrimination, specifically against LGBT civil rights. It has taken months of discussion, both with our organization and with the Alderman, for Chick-fil-A to come forward with these concessions and we feel this is a strong step forward for Chick-fil-A and the LGBT community, although it is only a step.”
The release claims that the internal document was sent to all company franchisees and stakeholders, and that it states that Chick-fil-A will “treat every person with honor, dignity and respect-regardless of their beliefs, race, creed, sexual orientation and gender,” and that the company’s “intent is not to engage in political or social debates.”
The Civil Rights Agenda’s policy advisor, Rick Garcia, praised the company for this positive step but said that it needs to go further, and that an internal memo is not enough:
“Although we are encouraged by their internal statement, we would still like for the company to adopt an anti-discrimination policy at the corporate level. It is one thing for a company to say they respect everyone they serve and employ, it is quite another for them to put that into their policies and demand that all employees adhere to that behavior. As we have heard from gay employees that work for Chick-fil-A, there is a culture of discrimination within the company and we would like to ensure that employees can speak out and call attention to those practices without fear of reprisal. It takes time to change the culture of any institution and steps like a corporate policy ensure that progress is made.”
What do you think? Does this latest development represent a real, substantive change in direction for the fast food chain, or is Chick-fil-A simply trying to do some damage control here?
They are behaving like politicians, in other words speaking out of both sides of the mouth so people on either side of an issue feel the company supports their position. Do I think Chick-fil-A is sincere about changing? Not on your life.
If they do stop donating to anti-gay groups, it’s only because they care about profit and not because they suddenly grew a conscience. Like most conservatives, all those “Christian” family values fly out the window when mammon comes knocking at the door.
It’s a corporation – a soulless entity whose main purpose and motive is profit. The same applies to LGBT friendly companies. I could care less what CFA’s CEO et. al. really care about on a personal level. The most important thing is that they’ve stopped giving money to an organization that fights my civil equality and treat their employees fairly.
Keep a hawk’s eye out for Dan Cathy making personal contributions to anti-gay-hate groups; that money would still be coming from Chick-fil-A profits.
The same could be said of companies that have long supported gay rights. If they actually start (and continue to do) the right thing I personally don’t care why they’re doing it.
Scott, I’m not really sure that anything can be done about personal contributions to the group. It’s the guy’s money and he can do with it what he wishes. I sure wouldn’t want to have anything to do with him socially, nor would anyone I know, but the best we can do there is to work at making giving that group money as socially acceptable as spitting a tobacco wad at a fancy restaurant or belonging to the KKK. It’ll end up being something someone is closeted about.
Too little. Too late. Complete publicity move based on bad press reactions and profit. Having them STOP supporting discrimination is not something they should be rewarded or applauded for. That is like giving a criminal an incentive for NOT committing a crime. To see them actually change and SUPPORT the groups they were financially, legally and socially discriminating against would be progress, but we all know that will never happen.
They said that they would “review” their donation policies, and said that they would not donate to two groups (FRC and NOM) which another news site noted that they didn’t fund anyway. Note the emphasis on “political groups” which leaves open the ability to continue funding ex-gay groups who don’t have lobbying arms. I’m also concerned that this agreement was struck with CFA’s real estate manager (in charge of developing new stores) and not with their actual board, and so I have a hard time believing that this is a real commitment by the management of the corporation. Only time will tell, but I won’t be holding my breath. Cathy made his feelings quite plain on the topic, and I suspect that nothing will really change.
“They said that they would “review” their donation policies, and said that they would not donate to two groups (FRC and NOM) which another news site noted that they didn’t fund anyway. ” Michael
And here is the problem. CFA was run up the pole as a symbol of everything evil and everything good (depending on one’s perspective). They can’t really negotiate away (or for) being a symbol that they weren’t in the first place.
To answer whether this is real change there has to be honesty about realities–not about symbols.
Asking for a corporate non-discrimination policy is a sensible goal. But even there one must ask what changes on the ground are needed and/or sought. How many corporations are there where if you gathered 40 gay employees and asked if they experienced any form of restricting/discriminatory policy or a work culture that did not fully embrace/affirm that no one would raise their hand?
The “don’t donate money to” issue was a big red herring. So no one is going to win or lose on that one (including the alleged recipients of the funds).
The biggest winners and losers will simply be those who wanted CFA to be a symbol of something–and who will spin this whichever way is to their liking or advantage–with virtually nothing to do with the reality of what CFA is on the ground–or what the reality is of gay persons who have any contact with CFA.
But on the other hand–I think there are winners if these conversations facilitated by Moreno led to relationships and speaking honestly back and forth. If they did so quietly, in good faith, without big egos, granting grace to each other, outlining to each other what is really important to each (and why)–then more power to all involved.
“The biggest winners and losers will simply be those who wanted CFA to be a symbol of something–and who will spin this whichever way is to their liking or advantage–with virtually nothing to do with the reality of what CFA is on the ground–or what the reality is of gay persons who have any contact with CFA.”
Melinda, I have to disagree with you here.
For those who defend Cathy as just stating his opinion, his sincere religious beliefs, can we deconstruct his personal religious beliefs?
I am a gay man, and american citizen, a tax payer, a law-abiding, productive, contributing member of my community and my society, well thought of by family, friends, and colleagues.
Mr. Cathy said that who I am, what I am, and what I ask/demand of my country as the afore-described citizen and tax payer, is AN AFFRONT TO ALMIGHTY GOD. (His versions of god– not mine, it might be noted– with whom Cathy is intimately acquainted, who just happens to agree with Cathy. God has offered no comment on the insult or the hubris).
I am offending– that’s what an affront is– the Holy of Holies, the Creator of the Universe. My request/demand that my government treat my life, my love, my family, my children, my assets, AND MY RELIGIOUS FAITH, as it does all other citizens is so offensive to his version of God, that God will send down his wrath upon the country, making MILLIONS of innocent people, innocent children, suffer for my offense.
This makes me a worse threat than terrorism, Wall Street, Al Quaeda, Islam, Atheism, and congressmen.
Mr. Cathy, being the kind of Christian he is– a Christain’t, a so-called Christian, A Pharasitical Christian– purports to know the mind of God, to know that status of relationship to god of any human being, and feels competent to render his judgment, IN EXPRESS VIOLATION OF JESUS’S COMMANDMENT NOT TO DO JUST THAT.
Mr. Cathy would seat himself on the throne of God, and you’ll remember the last being that did that, and the consequences for innocent people.
THOSE are his sincere religious beliefs.
And he backs them up by giving money to groups whose sole purpose is to demean, defame, and flat-out lie about gay people for partisan political advantage, power, money, and a rather constipated version of christianity. He then brags about, and asserts that mindless, baseles, outright lying attacks on me and mine are not only OK, but justified, given my offenses against god.
Cathy took the step to identify CFA with Dan cathy with God with the anti-gay Industry.
Dan cathy is the one that defined CFA on the ground.
Why would they need to make these internal changes? I thought their God-fearing base came out in droves to support them and show thanks for standing up to the tyrannical gay agenda. Shouldn’t they be rolling in money?
Ben–I think your response rather demonstrates exactly what I was saying.
You win.
You are one of the big winners.
You get to have the big evil CFA. You get to frame the world, a religion, a corporation and man as a conspiracy against you.
No, melinda, you’re quite wrong. I frankly don’t care much about chiknkrap at all. They aren’t located anywhere near me, I won’t eat their food and more than I’d buy an amway product or donate to Catholic charities.
I do care about antigay bigotry, and the hate speech that drips from the tongues of a certain class of christian.
cathy was the one that presumed to speak for god, not me.
Melinda, we know the world is not (entirely) against gays, but there is no doubt that that religion and that man are.
Are they using our definition of treating people equally? Or are the using the christian fundamentalist definition that everyone has the “right” to be a white, heterosexual, evangelical christian?
Honestly, it would be difficult for me to eat at Chik-fil-a again no matter what. The whole thing has left me with bad feelings and just quitting donating to anti-gay groups might not be enough to get rid of it.
Melinda–what planet are you coming from? Chik-fil-a donating money to anti-gay groups is certainly not a “red herring” and I think maybe you need to research what that term means. Chik-fil-a and it’s owners donated to groups that actively harm GLBT people here and around the world–I won’t eat at places that donate money to organizations that harm people–there’s nothing misleading about that.
This makes no sense. Chick-Fil-A shares the same ideology as the multitudes who gathered inside its locations on August 1; they give millions to the company. Why would the Cathys upset them by siding with a group of people who rarely eat CFA (LGBTs)?
Charz, you are fooling yourself if you think an appreciation day, even if it is held annually, is going to sustain a business. Those multitudes are NOT multitudinous enough alone to keep this company going. This possible change has nothing to do with attracting LGBT diners, either–it has to do with not turning off the massive middle that more and more really has no problem with LGBT and tends to wonder about anyone who hates them. That is the group Chick-Fil-A does not want saying “isn’t that that bigot restaurant? Eh, let’s eat at the next place.”
You might want to check this out. http://bit.ly/OOsQLx