Chick-fil-A has been a fast growing food chain, yet it has faced some controversy.
The company’s perceived anti-LGBTQ+ agenda has fueled much of this. In 2012, CEO Dan Cathy was quoted as believing in the “biblical definition of the family unit.” This strongly implied his disagreement with same sex marriage, a sentiment that has not been retracted.
The company has also received criticism for supporting charities such as the Salvation Army, Fellowship of Christian Athletes and other organizations that have also expressed anti LGBTQ+ sentiments. For senior Aabha Joshi, this is enough for the chain to not receive her business.
“I never eat there,” Joshi said. “Their beliefs don’t align with mine, and I’m not going to support that.”
However, Chick-fil-A recently changed the companies it is financially supporting. Salvation Army and Fellowship of Christian Athletes were among the few that were removed from the list; no remaining organizations have anti-LGBTQ+ ties.
For Drew Anderson, a prominent member of LGBTQ- rights group GLAAD, this change still leaves something to be desired. “Chick-fil-A investors, employees and customers can greet today’s announcement with cautious optimism,” he said. He also added that “Chick-Fil-A still lacks policies to ensure safe workplaces for LGBTQ employees and should unequivocally speak out against the anti-LGBTQ reputation that their brand represents.”
For Joshi, this shift in funds isn’t enough to sway her. “I would need them to publically change their viewpoints. Until there’s a guarantee that they won’t support those organizations in the future, I won’t be eating there,” she said.
Others saw the change in funds as a shift in the wrong direction. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee tweeted out his opinion. “Today, @Chick-fil-A betrayed loyal customers for $$,” he said. “I regret believing they would stay true to convictions of founder Truette Cathey. Sad.”
It is unclear what message Chick-fil-A was attempting to send to the public when revising their choice of charities, or if there even was a message at all. However, the decision has garnered attention. It could be the first step towards undoing a long held reputation, or it could just stem from a desire to support new causes.
