Boycott Against McDonalds

Will it Work?

Published on July 12, 2008 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Current Events

I heard about this boycott last week. It's a boycott against McDonald's for supporting same sex marriage for throwing their money and support to the homosexual activists. Many feel that McDonald's is abandoning those who helped make McDonald's the successful company it is namely familes with children. I don't like McDonald's anyhow, so it doesn't really affect me. I'd much rather go to Subway, BK, or Wendy's anyhow.

I didn't even know, until now, that there was a National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, did you? So the American Family Association has called for this boycott. This is from their site:

Throwing out any pretense of being neutral in the culture war, McDonald's has taken up the rhetoric of gay activists, suggesting those who oppose same-sex marriage (SSM) are motivated by hate.

AFA has asked for a boycott of McDonald's restaurants because of the companyâ€™s promotion of the gay agenda. AFA asked McDonaldâ€™s to remain neutral in the culture war. McDonaldâ€™s refused.

In response to the boycott, McDonald's spokesman Bill Whitman suggested to the Washington Post that those who oppose SSM are motivated by hate, saying "...hatred has no place in our culture." McDonald's has decided to adopt the "hate" theme used by gay activist groups for years.

Whitman went on to say, "We stand by and support our people to live and work in a society free of discrimination and harassment." Mr. Whitman has intentionally avoided addressing the reason for the boycott. This boycott is not about hiring gays or how gay employees are treated. It is about McDonald's choosing to put the full weight of their corporation behind promoting their agenda.

McDonald's donated $20,000 to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce in exchange for membership and a seat on the groupâ€™s board of directors. The NGLCC lobbies Congress in support of same-sex marriage.

McDonald's CEO Jim Skinner said the company will promote issues they approve. "Being a socially responsible organization is a fundamental part of who we are. We have an obligation to use our size and resources to make a difference in the world...and we do."

Comments (Page 13)

181

Dr Guy

on Aug 19, 2010

To me I think it makes more sense for a business to give to the Conservatives than it does the Liberals. To me it just makes good economic sense. I can't imagine a business wanting to give to the liberals who are not only willing to take that money but the rest that's in the till as well.

Here's my 2 lincolns - big business is not about economic sense, but economic power. And it is easier to legislate your opposition out of the market than it is to beat them out of the market with superior performance and products. Thus, while small business is generally fiscally conservative (the entrepreneur is still running the show and knows what it means to have a couple of extra bucks to rub together), big business is just in the market of shortchanging the market by whatever political party will do it for them.

182

Nitro Cruiser

on Aug 19, 2010

I had to take a minute to remember this article I wrote so long ago now. You bring up an interesting point Nitro. I was wondering where you were in the discussion as I looked over a few of the pages to refamiliarize myself with the subject matter.

First, sorry KFC I should have been clearer in my inital comment. It was a comment by Chuck that led me (back) to your article (his comment, not his article, it yours). After re-reading my my comment it just plain comes off wrong, even though it is clearly visibly your article.

I never commented on this issue back in 2008, I really didn't have anything constructive to add. I comment now, just to see how people feel now that the role is slightly reversed. Were the comments make by those posting in support of fairness, against unfairness, in support of homosexuality, or against it. It's really about people. Rarely do we get an opportunity where an issue is reversed as this one is. That's why I resurrected it, this particular issue still doesn't interest me much, but the dynamics of two opposite stories with the same commenter's does. Hope I explained that clearly.

So what is your opinion?

Well for me, I look at it this particular issue this way. One could take the gayness out of the equation entirely. It boils down to one group threatening a company to pony up an equal amount of money in support of their cause, because of a contribution made to someone they don't like, or face a boycott. It almost sounds like extortion to me. I would imagine it would be difficult for one to buy many of the things they need if they followed that line of thinking. Not saying a boycott is never appropriate (I'd like to see one on Venezuelan oil), but not domestic businesses as impact on US workers should be minimized as much as possible.

183

Dr Guy

on Aug 20, 2010

It boils down to one group threatening a company to pony up an equal amount of money in support of their cause, because of a contribution made to someone they don't like, or face a boycott. It almost sounds like extortion to me.

Great point!

184

Adventure-Dude

on Aug 20, 2010

Just like our politicians and welfare?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!