Had a discussion with my students re: Chik-fil-A. They’ve given money to anti-LGBTQ causes, but they’ve also contributed to charities and community organizations. The kids were (mostly) of the firm belief that the one does not wipe out the other, with which I thought I agreed, but I did wonder whether there was any “wiggle room”. Perhaps I’m not spelling out my question: can an organization “repent”, and how much is needed?
It is not “repenting” if one continues to do bad while also doing good.
That’s so obvious I feel embarrassed for not suggesting it. Thank you. Perhaps they weren’t the best example.
I thought that buying indulgences was banned in 1567, but I see know that they are making a comeback. But only one per day and they only take a certain amount of time off of your stay in purgatory. What is 100 years off of eternity?
Probably a better example would be Barilla pasta.
To a certain extent, you can’t. It’s why Planned Parenthood’s “Abortions are only 3% of what we do” argument has never flown with the pro-life crowd.
That is a much better example. Thank you.
What if they don’t continue to do bad?
If and when they stop donating to anti-LGBTQ (or whatever the bad thing is), what does it take for an organization to be “forgiven”?
Contrition
Mostly a lot of time. Enough time to see that they’ve really stopped doing the bad stuff, and maybe actually doing good stuff. Done consistently for long enough that it doesn’t look like they’re just trying to cover their ass. A big one-time donation to, say, Pride Day events isn’t enough.
How much time depends on many factors, like how long they were being jerks beforehand, and how far the other way do they go - do they just stop discriminating, which is literally the least they can do, or do they take an active role in understanding why people were upset to begin with, and make positive steps to correct the problems they caused.
For some groups, it may be functionally impossible to meet this burden. In the Chick-Fil-A example, they’d likely have to renounce their current faith that prompted their behavior in the first place, which I consider to be a highly unlikely occurrence.
I don’t know about the public in general, but I would say they would need to publicly renounce whatever it was that they had done and take concrete steps to make sure it doesn’t happen in the future.
I think a good example of this is Papa John’s which excised their racist CEO amid much controversy, ranting and gnashing of teeth, and has seemed to keep their nose relatively clean since, resulting in a bit of a bounce back.
Ask to be forgiven would be the bare minimum.
That’s a bigger one that most people realize.
A lot of organizations often try a grand gesture first without asking if it’s a good idea or engaging with the affected group. “They did X, which you didn’t ask for and they never consulted you about. So, you should forgive them” is all too common. And it’s also associated with turning things around on victims than a real sign of reflection and contrition.
I would say they at least have to do something to actually offset the bad thing they were doing. So, say, Chick-fil-A would need to not only stop giving to anti-gay organizations, but also start giving to pro-LGBT organizations. Part of a proper apology is attempting to make restitution for your mistake.
In the case of Chick-fil-A, it would be to make a really really good chicken sandwich.
I say it depends on how much, or what segment of, the public you want to sway back in your favor.
The Hell’s Angles are organized crime, period. They are also quite well known for giving a lot of money to “nice” charities and making public showings of how nice/good/generous to the community they are. And that works to keep a certain percentage of people on their side; they are not universally hated. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone jumps into this thread to defend them because of all the PR they do. But like in politics, that only works for a percentage of people.
If you want mainstream forgiveness or acceptance, then yes it takes actual dedicated long-term change. But it doesn’t have to be of the groveling “I’m sorry I made a mistake” variety. It can be done smart and even at a profit. My example is the sport of mixed martial arts (MMA) and the relatively recent inclusion of women’s divisions.
In the US at least, the dominant MMA organizations’ president/leader very publicly and openly stated several years ago that he thought women would never have a place in that sport, or at least in his organization, and kept it male-only. But he said so for business reasons… didn’t think it would sell. Fast-forward many years and not only have female fighters proven marketable and popular for fans, but legitimate stars and million dollar contracts for women fighters have been signed. You probably know some of their names.
That organization didn’t have to issue apologies or donate money; they just used smart marketing to communicate to the public that “oh yeah we’re listening, and times are a changin’… you want it so here we (and only we) have it for you: buy your tickets now!!!” They’ve done an about-face and are now, after long-term investment, making a profit off a form of sexism they once championed. And that organization will probably be remembered for starting women’s MMA. It’s a little bit ironic.
For the Chick fil-A example, there would have to be reversal from supporting anti-gay organizations to clearly supporting LGBT rights and diversity and equity in general.
And for me, it would either take a long time to trust that it was a real change, or there could be a change of ownership or management accompanying it that could potentially make me get on board in a shorter time.
Yeah, that’s pretty much it. If the leaders of an organization were doing things that I disapprove of, then I’m not going to have a hard time trusting those leaders to change their ways. It may happen, but people don’t really change all that much, especially on things like that.
OTOH, an organization has no morals or ethics itself, and so if it is under new leadership, then I can take a fresh look at the direction they are going, and not hold the views and actions of the previous leaders against it.
Chic-Fil-A is in the unique position on this issue, they could come out with the love of humanity that Christ showed, They would also seem to be obligated to do so. Admit their interpretation was incorrect, and wanting the Love of Christ to be the one in control, not hatred for each other. So yes they could repent, and that repentance could make a great difference and IMHO wipe out the error of their past.
But if they do not, just distance themselves from anti-LGBQ, without saying anything about it, but only support good causes. Well time will prove them out, but yes it will take time to bring them to the level of a positive, doing the right thing in the eyes of the Lord by the examples over time.