According to a statement from Civil Right Agenda, a homosexual rights group, Moreno has confirmed that Chick-fil-A will no longer give money to “anti-gay organizations” through its charitable foundation, WinShape, and has agreed to clarify “in an internal document that the company will treat every person equally, regardless of sexual orientation.” Moreno says he will no longer oppose Chick-fil-a’s efforts to open a location in Logan Square.
However, it is unclear how much has really changed.
... Interestingly, many news agencies reported that Civil Rights Agenda press release had originally mentioned Focus on the Family and the National Organization for Marriage as specific organizations that WinShape would no longer donate to.
That statement is no longer in the homosexual organization’s release. And it’s not hard to figure out why. Neither of these organizations received any funds from WinShape in 2010 – the last year for which figures are available. In fact, according to a statement from NOM today, NOM has never received funding from WinShape.
... NOM President Brian Brown told LifeSiteNews today that the egregious part of this story is that an alderman would tell a company what they can or can’t believe if they are to be granted access to the marketplace. “Dan Cathy has not changed his position on marriage,” he said, adding that he is still urging pro-marriage Americans to support the restaurant chain.
9 Comments
Yes, same-sex marriage political advocates in their minds claim success for something that hasn't happened. They use a self-serving lie as a marketing tool, and then they call people bigots. They must think the Liberal Media is going to publicize their point of view, only. Problem is, they show their real face, and people wonder if they are just political, or whether they are actually affected mentally.
"Dan Cathy Has Not Changed His Position on Marriage"
>> But that was never the question, Brian. The question was whether Dan Cathy had agreed not to donate to certain objectionable groups in order to satisfy the homosexualists running Chicago.
It appears that he did.
""the egregious part of this story is that an alderman would tell a company what they can or can’t believe if they are to be granted access to the marketplace"
>> Bingo. The other egregious part of the stroy is whether CFA acquiesced in this totalitarian nightmare.
Rick, I'm on your side on this one... did CFA cave in to the wants of the LGBT? Period. If they did then I nolonger support their organization.
BREAKING NEWS:
Chick-fil-A CEO Denies Giving 'Concessions' to Open Chicago Restaurant
http://news.yahoo.com/chick-fil-ceo-denies-giving-concessions-open-chicago-200551778--abc-news-politics.html
Also read some of the comments for the article.
As a general rule with the exception to this article, Yahoo.com basically advocates for the LGBT movement, their stories are usually bias and they are aways having to retract their false reporting. Trust me on this one...
@Rick DeLano
"The question was whether Dan Cathy had agreed not to donate to certain objectionable groups in order to satisfy the homosexualists running Chicago."
Perhaps but the headlines were that Chick-Fil-A had changed its position on same-sex marriage. Which they didn't. They never mentioned Dan Cathy specifically.
I'm glad that he hasn't abandoned his position and I hope he doesn't stop donating.
Why should CFA be different from anyone else, bullied into "tolerance" like the rest of the so-called supporters of ss"m." Thank God we have private voting booths where people do not have to fear expressing their true views on the issue.
The gestapo tactics of homosexuals goes at least as far back as the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, where the homosexuals came banging on the door of Lot's house , demanding that Lot allow them to have anal sex with Lot's visitors. That is how they were then, that is how they are now, but our society is too stupid to recognize the danger.
Anyways I would like to say I had Chick-Fil-A on my way home from Disneyland yesterday. And it was delicious.
Wow, you don't pretend that that's a good thing at all.
Surprisingly honest.
"They use a self-serving lie as a marketing tool, and then they call people bigots."
I don't know what's going on with this. Maybe it *is* a lie.
But you're commenting on NOM's blog--surely you realize that over 90% of everything posted here is t the very *least* extraordinarily dishonest, and usually flat-out lies. (For example, the tweet linking to to this post is a lie, and then there's the quotation marks around "anti-gay"--it's hard to get a more objective and literal description of the problem than that. Just because you don't *like* the truth doesn't mean you can imply the others are lying.)
And groups that exist for the sole purpose of harming minority groups that they hate are quite certainly bigoted. Look it up; it's a word with a meaning, not just a code phrase slung around like a weapon--that's totally *your* side's thing, what with the lack of true words available for your use.
@Zack: Buying a sandwich--or doing anything at all, really--for the sole purpose of showing off how much you hate certain people is not something to brag about.