Well, it seems that the nit-wittery that is political correctness, which had its beginnings in being sensitive to others' points-of-view, has done got way out of hand, to wit:
- Chick-Fil-A, a privately owned corporation, says it supports traditional values.
- Mayors of Boston, Chicago and San Francisco denounce Chick-Fil-A because franchisees support Christian groups that support traditional families (i.e. one man + one woman).
- The company's CEO Dan Cathy, does not denounce his or his franchisees' support of traditional values, and, in fact, confirms them.
- Note that CFA is not discriminating against gays in hiring or serving - it's just not following the script that gay advocacy groups and the progressive movement say that it should. They didn't write a check to Westboro Baptist Church.
- It seems that tolerance and acceptance are no longer sufficient - there must be no dissent from their agenda.
- I don't hate on the gays - they can do as they wish - but I won't be forced to celebrate gayness.
- I usually prepare my own meals on weekends, but today I enjoyed a spicy chicken sandwich with Pepper Jack cheese and ranch dressing from the CFA near Grapevine Mills Mall.
- This past week, Greece suspended female athlete Paraskevi Papachristou, a triple jumper, from participating with that nation's Olympic team for remarking: "With so many Africans in Greece, the mosquitoes from the West Nile will at least be eating some homemade food."
- The remark was deemed racist. Can someone explain this to me?
- I could understand if the remark somehow demeaned Africans - but it simply says there are a lot of them in Greece.
- If I observed that there were lots of Italians, Chinese, and Mexicans in Little Italy, Chinatown, and Little Mexico - would that constitute a racist comment?
2 comments:
My question is why does a corporation want to have a "we don't want your kind" mentality? That's not a good business model.
I'm more of an "I'd like to give (sell) the world a Coke and sing a song of harmony" kinda guy.
That's the thing - CFA isn't beating down on the gays, in employment or serving. Their support of the church and traditional family is not tantamount to attacking gays, but that's how it's been portrayed by the gay agenda.
Your point about the business model is valid - it does not make sense to disenfranchise a significant portion of one's potential customer base. Inasmuch as CFA was founded and is guided by Biblical values, the tradition-minded constitute their established core base.
If, in order to satiate the gay agenda's demands, CFA adverts featured LGBTIQ images, they would likely have significant revenue runoff, without any guarantee of an offset from new business.
Johnny Mercer wrote:
"You've got to accentuate the positive/
Eliminate the negative/
Latch on to the affirmative/
Don't mess with Mister In-Between."
I am a Christian - my Christianity informs my actions, mostly. One of my former titles was 'AVP-Marketing'. There are market segments, whether for goods or services, and I don't mean stereotypical gay pursuits or things of a sexual nature, but rather such things as insurance, luxury cars, fine clothing, spirits, electronics - where (if I were a consultant) I could absolutely recommend target marketing to the gay community - inasmuch as the demographic typically has a higher education level and disposable household income than the general population.
The reason the CFA story has become an uproar is because it is privately owned, and as such, Dan Cathy and his franchisees may hold whatever opinion they please. If the company were public, the stores would've been open on Sundays decades ago and minority shareholders representing whatever issue group would've long ago disrupted annual meetings to assert their opinions.
Personally, I find it refreshing that someone will stand by his beliefs, even in the storm of a public attack.
Post a Comment