[madprof98]

They don't even consider the possibility that the company has grown at least in part BECAUSE OF the "uproar" they themselves created.

[albie]

The company also opened 96 news stores”

...so now they’re in the “news” business? I’ll bet CFA could do a better job than the putz that wrote this article.

[Uncle Miltie]

The boycott that caused a 14% increase in revenues?

I need to be more inflammatory. Maybe I can get them to boycott my business!

[Yardstick]

...or in states where marriage equality is legal.

Orwellian.

[slumber1]

The unseen damage, they said, was to the company’s reputation

It is "unseen" damage because it is imaginary - like unicorns and leprechauns. This damage only exists in the imagination of the author

[Responsibility2nd]

“....the “uproar” they themselves created.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You are so correct. The suits at CFA had a Board Meeting and decided that yes - it would be a good idea to inflame the fags and the enemedia and initate a pro-queer boycott.

/s

Not really sure what your intents are in posting this, but there was some tool yesterday that posted an anti-CFA hit piece and then went on to smear Dan Cathy and defend the faggots.

Pissed me off.

What is wrong with some people around here who hate the Godly Christian vales of CFA and - at the same time - swallow the MSM lies and smears?

[RetiredArmy]

God bless em. We ate there yesterday in our mall. I will keep supporting them.

[jeffc]

...Dan Cathy’s controversial comments...

There's that word again, "controversial", which the "media" only apply to statements made by conservatives. When that word is used, you know the "story" you are reading is nothing more than a thinly disguised (if disguised at all!) opinion attack piece.

[nascarnation]

To me, it’s the Lexus of fast food.
Exceptionally clean facilities, wonderful employees, and excellent food.
Glad to see them prosper, despite the fervent wishes of the media for them to stumble.

[ReformationFan]

‘Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy’s controversial comments on “biblical” marriage’

Why is the word “biblical” in quotes?

Definition of the word biblical-

1.of or in the Bible: a Biblical name.

2.in accord with the Bible

“Same sex-marriage” does not exist in the Bible. Even some intellectually honest liberals admit this. I know of one who said quite rightly something along the lines of: “The Bible and/or Christianity didn’t give us gay rights. Secularism gave us gay rights”. And he was absolutely correct in this statement. Why can’t the libs own this?

There are only 2 types marriages that are mentioned in the Bible:

1) One man to one woman.

2) One man to two or more women.

Those are the only marriages that can honestly use the descriptive term biblical.