Wow, looks like no bean burrito. That sucks.
One of my radical feminist lesbian sister’s granddaughters asked if they could eat at “Chick A Fill.” That’s what my family calls it, usually in a negative tone. And my sister said “No, we don’t eat there ever.”
“You don’t want any of those chickens.”
Mebbe those chickens ought to think about having stars tattooed on their bellies…
Is there a radical feminist lesbian joke there somewhere? Seems like there should be but I can’t quite put it together.
Interestingly, when the minicomputer maker Digital Equipment Corp was still a thing, they chose Reading for their UK (and European) R&D headquarters. Mind you, DEC was famous for setting up shop where land was cheap. Ken Olsen believed in never spending a quarter when a dime would do about as well.
I note that Chick-fil-A just opened their first (and only) Canadian location in Toronto last month. It was naturally met by tons of protests – the one on opening day inviting them to cluck off – the idea being apparently that a mediocre chicken sandwich wasn’t worth putting up with the bigotry. It remains to be seen if they, too, will be closing up shop soon. But unlike the Reading location in the UK, their location in Canada is right in the heart of downtown Toronto. If this is a trial run, it seems odd to locate it on the most expensive real estate in the country. All I can say is I won’t be there any time soon, meaning not ever.
It’s wonderful when I can definitely answer the question. I have eaten at Taco Bell in probably 40 US States, Canada and the U.K. The UK menu is mostly similar and they do have bean burritos. The main differences were the pork quesadillas and the fries.
Here’s a picture for proof https://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g187069-d4469075-Reviews-Taco_Bell-Manchester_Greater_Manchester_England.html#photos;aggregationId=101&albumid=101&filter=7&ff=194395782
Chipotle U.K. is almost identical to the USA except for no sofritas. The U.K. one never had the chorizo when that was available in the USA, I don’t know about the carne asada.
Tortilla and Barburrito are two similar chains to Chipotle with slightly larger menus. Changos Burrito Bar is excellent should you find yourself in Liverpool or Manchester.
Yes, I go to the U.K. to eat Mexican food!
Did you ever eat at Chimichanga? It was sort of Brit-Tex-Mex but for all that I rather liked it, plus it was the only place I’ve ever seen that sold Manzana Loca Tequila Cider. The whole restaurant chain went out of business and the cider doesn’t seem to be made anymore, alas.
I’m not going to tell someone to or not to boycott someplace they don’t like. But honestly, why does anyone care what a perfect stranger thinks, or where they donate their money to? I personally couldn’t care less who or what anyone does with their money. I’ll bet you every single restaurant owner has given money to somethingor an organization I disagree with. But I am not even slightly bothered to try and look it up.
I mean, unless the school’s discrimination policy keeps a firm eye on every little thing students and faculty spend their money on, I don’t see how CFA would be breaking any rules… If you’re thinking you’ll see them deny serving chicken to anyone being openly gay, you’re going to be pretty disappointed.
Knowing about it makes all the difference. The money I would spend there becomes their money, and I ain’t gonna do it. Ignorance is bliss with that issue, because I’m sure some of the money I hand over goes to people that would spend it in a way I would detest. So, it’s in the knowing.
ETA: And I would prefer to know all of it. I would have no problem boycotting a thousand places.
It’s my understanding they don’t discriminate in the HIRING of LBGT folks. Is that not true?
That’s not one I ever made it to. I’m a huge fan of Wahaca, even went there on Cinco de Mayo this year for the £5 margaritas.
I think it’s the scope of the company, they’re quite explicit about their religion as well as the fact that they align with the right wing flavor of Christianity. Plus, the scale of their company makes them easier to avoid. If I go to a mom and pop place in South Carolina and they send a $20 donation to Trump that’s a lot different than Chik fil a donating millions. When you donate millions, you get a seat at the table and are able to be heard.
Well, they’re donating money to organizations that are actively working to restrict or remove my civil rights, so I feel I gotta care at least a little about that.
Only that Chick A Fil’s owner is very anti-gay, has donated millions in money to anti-gay causes, and is a rah-rah (radical religious) Christian.
Similar reason I don’t patronize Curves because the owner is very anti-abortion.
Like I said above: You have a right to your beliefs. I have a right to not support you if I disagree with them.
Would you feel differently if the restaurant owner was actively hostile to you, instead of just giving money to an organization that you disagree with? For example, if there was an active movement to revoke the kind of marriage that you and people close to you engage in, and that was not a fringe opinion but has enough support that in many states it’s only held in check by the federal government, would you worry about that? (like gay marriage in the US) Or what if it was a restaurant that believe in segregating people like you to be served only at the back door and not the main dining room? (like segregation back when that was around). “Something I disagree with” is pretty much inevitable in the real world, but “directly and vocally supports direct attacks on the lives of me and people close to me” is pretty rare.
Chick-Fil-A does not discriminate against customers or employees. If they did, there would be lawsuits galore.
The corporation donates to such reprehensible groups as Junior Achievement, the Salvation Army, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Paul Anderson Group Homes, local not-for-profits through True Inspiration Awards, and Chick-Fil-A scholarships.
The founder is a Christian who supports Biblical, traditional marriage. Somehow, patronizing his business is hate but trying to destroy the lives of people like him isn’t.
Who is trying to destroy lives? Please, be specific and descriptive. Provide, you know, details.
No. Donating to anti-gay causes can indeed ruin lives, but choosing not to patronize the business of a millionaire does not destroy anyone’s lives.
Yes, on the other hand, fighting against bigotry is not hate. Bigotry is hate. Hating bigotry is merely hating a sin. God Himself hates sin. Hating bigotry is not bigoted. It is an act of Love.
That “traditional marriage” concept is not defined in the Bible. Nowhere in the Bible is gay marriage even mentioned, let alone said to be sinful. Marriage in the Bible is actually quite different from the marriage of today–it allows for polygamy. It is required for you to marry your brother’s widow if she is childless, and her first male child will be your nephew. That’s because it’s all about inheritance.
What you are doing is using the religion of Christianity to cover up for hate. He’s not “a Christian who supports Biblical traditional marriage.” He is a businessman who is donating to charities whose main goal is to harm LGBT+ people, who also happens to consider himself a Christian.
It remains un-Christian to try and use your religion as an excuse for bigotry and hate.
**Stop trying to make the millionaire bigot into the victim. **