Pro-family groups this week lauded the recent decision by McDonald’s to no longer support the efforts of activists working to advance the homosexual agenda.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Matt Sayles)Customers enter a McDonald's restaurant in Los Angeles on Monday, July 28, 2008.
“The Big Mac attack on family values is finally over,” exclaimed Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, to supporters Friday. “After a five-month boycott, Americans finally got what they ordered – McDonald's agreement to stop financing the homosexual agenda.”
In late March, McDonald’s drew a stream of controversy after the company’s vice president of communications joined the board of directors of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC) – an organization “dedicated to expanding the economic opportunities and advancements of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender/Transsexual (LGBT) business community.”
The American Family Association, in response, said that the move – combined with a $20,000 donation McDonald’s handed over to the NGLCC and the fast-food chain’s frequent and boastful support in sponsoring gay pride parades – was detrimental to pro-family causes and the sanctity of marriage and requested for McDonald’s to remove its name and logo from the NGLCC Web site and drop the endorsement of the organization by the VP of communications.
When McDonald’s rebuffed the requests, AFA began asking its two million supporters to boycott the popular fast-food chain.
"[T]he company has ramped up its support of the gay agenda and it leaves us no option but to call for a boycott,” said AFA Chairman Don Wildmon in a statement earlier this summer.
While some criticized AFA’s efforts, accusing them of being “haters,” the pro-family group emphasized that the boycott was not about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald's, or how homosexual employees are treated.
"Our concern was: Here is a family-friendly company that has, all of a sudden, joined hands and became a partner and ally with an organization that is absolutely attacking the moral foundation of our nation; trying to redefine marriage in our nation," recalled Buddy Smith, executive assistant to AFA’s chairman.
"All we were asking is that they just simply be neutral in the culture wars and focus on doing their business and remain neutral," he told the Chicago Sun-Times.
Supporters of the boycott further noted that McDonald’s could have chosen to support efforts such as those against poverty, hunger or child abuse rather than controversial ones.
After months of boycott, McDonald’s eventually informed AFA of their decision to remain neutral in the culture war regarding homosexual “marriage,” reporting that they have no plans to renew their membership in NGLCC when it expires in December.
Furthermore, in a Sept. 23 memo revealed this week to AFA, the nation's No. 1 hamburger chain had told franchised owners that its policy is “to not be involved in political and social issues.”
“McDonald's remains neutral on same sex marriage or any 'homosexual agenda' as defined by the American Family Association," the memo stated.
Following McDonald’s report to AFA, group chair Wildmon told supporters that the boycott of McDonald’s was ending.
“We appreciate the decision by McDonald's to no longer support political activity by homosexual activist organizations,” he stated in his message Thursday.
Earlier this year, AFA ended a two-year boycott of Ford Motor Co., saying the company had met most of its demands, which included ending donations to groups that support same-sex “marriage.”
Other companies that have been the targets of AFA boycotts include 7-Eleven, the Walt Disney Company, and Abercrombie & Fitch. Most recently, on Aug. 25, the AFA announced its boycott of Hallmark Cards for their decision to start selling same-sex wedding cards.
RSS
igh, many would say the same about the Christian community. I wouldn't be so quick to judge!
igh,
Please do not call people names, even mild ones. If you want to correct people, pray for them and give scripture. Participate in the discussion, but not be derogatory.
gays are twisted in their thinking.
I have talked to many. And not just on the net.
You gave your opinion of what God said. Thanks for that.
"Despite your 4 responses, I still disagree."
Many, many movies have that one character who just doesn't believe what they are being told and end up paying a terrible price.
Reality bites.
Mike: Sir, I have given you the truth as God's Word reveals and not my opinion. My opinion is meaningless. God could care less about my opinion as well as yours. It's what is written in His Word that matters. But, obviously, with your defiant attitude toward me and God's Word, you will carry on in your sin and deceptions of your own thoughts, to your own judgment. "There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Prov. 14:12).
mike22685, the issue is not the types of sexual intimacy, but the participants. Sexual intimacy is reserved for the marriage bed of one man and one woman united in marriage in the sight of God, that one man having sexual intimacy with that one woman alone. Anyone who has sexual intimacy outside of those parameters is sinning in the sight of God.
Mike: Let me add this also. If a man and a wife, who have been married by God, if they go outside of that union and do any of those things you mentioned with the opposite sex, they would be just as much in violation as homosexuals would be. Except it would be considered adultery. Those intimacies are exclusive to a married man and woman.
Mike: A man and woman through those intimacies is what causes God to join them together making them one. It is called being married. Homosexuality is an affront and violation to the design and purpose God intended when He created man and woman. He does not join (marry) two people of the same sex. It's impossible to be done. A great book that describes all of this completely is "It's Good For A Man Not To Touch A Woman." Author Edward Ridenour. Hope this helps!
Mike: If they were created distinctly so they can make a union intimately, which homosexuals cannot, then, all the other sexual pleasures are not wrong. For homosexuals to engage in those acts, who can never experience the union that heterosexuals can and were never designed by God to experience, all other sexual intimacies are in violation of the created law. Continued.
Mike: My dear friend, it's not about what I suspect is sinful or not, it's about God's law and how and for what purpose He made a man and woman. It is the law of creation. It is not wrong for married (in the Lord) heterosexuals to engage in those things, because first, they were created differently for the purpose of being intimate, i.e., to encourage the fulfilling of the command to "multiply and replenish the earth." Continued.
Mike: I keep trying to answer, but when I submit, it always reads "Page not found." I'll try later if this message goes through.
If that is the case, then you cannot use the affront that homosexuality goes against the natural design of a man and woman, because what I just asked you is exactly how a homosexuality couple would be intimate. I don't believe that just because you are married, what was once sin is suddenly something that is intimate and magically OK with God. Its either sinful or its not, and I suspect its not sinful in your eyes because that way you can engage in it once you are married.
Mike: Heb. 13:4 "Marriage is honorable in all and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulterers, God will judge." What a man and woman does intimately among themselves, if married in the Lord, and what is done is acceptable and unharmful to the other, then, yes. All those things you mentioned are not sinful, because they two are one together and within the will and design of God in marriage. Any of those acts done outside of that marriage is fornication.
elbib, then let me ask you this: Is it OK for a husband and wife to engage in oral, anal, or masturbatory sex?