NL- I’m not a big fast food eater, but when I am traveling, Chik-Fil-A got my vote as to where to stop. An 8 piece nuggets, (that I share with my dog), waffle fries and a diet Dr Pepper is my preferred meal. But after reading the below, I won’t be eating there anymore. I can’t support a company that doesn’t support equal rights for all. Bye yummy, greasy, chicken.. 🙁
From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
Want a side order of anti-gay rhetoric with your chicken sandwich?
Chik-Fil-A might be able to help you with that.
According to EqualityMatters.org, the fast food company donated nearly $2 million in 2009 to groups that have anti-gay agendas.
IRS 990 forms show that WinShape, the restaurant chain’s charitable foundation which was founded by Chick-Fil-A’s chairman S. Truett Cathy in 1994, gave to the following groups in 2009:
Marriage & Family Legacy Fund: $994,199
Fellowship Of Christian Athletes: $480,000
National Christian Foundation: $240,000
Focus On The Family: $12,500
Eagle Forum: $5,000
Exodus International: $1,000
Family Research Council: $1,000
An earlier investigation by Equality Matters found that Chick-Fil-A, which was recently voted the third most beloved restaurant chain in the United States, donated more than $1 million to anti-gay groups between 2003 and 2008. The IRS forms from 2009 are the most recent available as public records.
In January Chick-Fil-A president Dan Cathy defended the chain saying, "We’re not anti-anybody… Our mission is to create raving fans."
Cathy was also forced to respond to gay activists’ claims after the company provided lunch at a marriage-training event sponsored by Pennsylvania Family Institute.
Cathy asserted, "While my family and I believe in the Biblical definition of marriage, we love and respect anyone who disagrees."
In recent months students attending at least six universities, including University of North Texas, Mississippi State University, and the University of New Orleans, have launched petitions asking their schools not to support anti-LGBT businesses like Chick-Fil-A.
LGBT activists have also staged protests at a number of the chain’s locations throughout the country, including Chicago and Hollywood.
Unless Chick-Fil-A RENOUNCES their ANTI-LGBT stance, I urge EVERYONE to boycott the chain.
So if they donate money to the gay groups the people with Christian families can complain they are anti Christian or devil worshipers?
We are getting more and more crazy over being PC for all aspects of life.
Cindi, with all due respect (and I have much respect for you) your statement “I can’t support a company that doesn’t support equal rights for all” is absolutely ridiculous and inconsistent coming as it does from someone who allows Shelley Lubben/Pink Cross Foundation to advertise on her sites AND publishes her Op/Eds.
Let’s start with the issue of homosexuality — Lubben believes that homosexuality is an abomination, and promotes the very same type of “Exodus” ministries as Chick-Fil-A / WinShape, above. She believes that homosexuals can and must be cured of their gayness. Lubben equates homosexuals with rapists, child molesters and drug dealers. See this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBCp5-6aEQs
Then there’s Shelley Lubben’s racist remarks (some, but not all, of which can be found in The Devil and Shelley Lubben episode 1), and the support she receives from white supremacist and anti-semitic groups (groups which she has never, to my knowledge, publicly renounced).
As for pornography — the subject matter to which your sites are devoted; the business from which your (other) advertisers derive income; the product of which your sites’ visitors are interested in — Lubben seeks to ERADICATE IT. That is her STATED goal. Not “better pornography,” not “safer pornography” — NO pornography.
Anyone with half a brain now knows BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT that Shelley Lubben is a liar and con artist whose book is full of lies. Virtually everyone named in her book, other than her partner in crime (Gary the ex-drug dealer), and her poor eldest daughter (the “trick baby”) who was so abused and neglected in her life that she craves her mother’s love enough to go along with whatever she says, MAINTAINS IT IS FICTIONAL AND/OR WILDLY DISTORTED TO CREATE “A BETTER STORY.” In this case, a better story means one from which Mrs. Lubben can raise money.
Until the day that you demonstrate the backbone, ethics and intellectual consistency to cease promoting this mentally ill, drug and alcohol addicted, manipulative ENEMY of the industry, I’d humbly suggest that you refrain from taking moral stands about people and groups with dark agendas.
I’ve heard your response — I give air to both sides. Well, if that’s how you see Shelley Lubben — as a valid “side” in some debate, then you might as well eat at Chick-Fil-A every damn day. It’s the same thing — after all, Dan Cathy has taken a side in a public debate as well.
In fact, in this case it’s actually worse, because YOU have presumably taken money or other value from this enemy of the adult industry, and promoted her lies and her anti-pron, anti-gay agenda, while profiting from it.
If you can rationalize promoting Shelley Lubben, then go ahead and keep eating at Chick-Fil-A.
Well…I’m a Church’s guy when it comes to fried chicken, and we don’t even have a Chik-fil-A anywhere around my neck of the woods, so I guess I don’t have to worry about double standards.
As for what Michael said: well, my opinion, Cindi, is that it’s your blog to do as you will, but he does have a point about the slight hypocrisy in calling for a boycott of Chick-fil-A for their antigay policies while giving the Ministress a platform here to shill her own antiporn/antigay views.
On the other hand, Michael, it should be noted that Cindi isn’t taking sides so much as she’s allowing all sides to have a platform. She’s not like Lubben or the other antiporn shills, who wouldn’t even allow our side any space to even begin with.
As always, though, to each his/her own opinion.
Anthony
I love waffle fries..
Cindi has run what I must assume are/were paid advertisements for Lubben’s Pink Cross. That’s advertisement, not permitting debate.
My point is not that Cindi shouldn’t present all sides, it’s that she shouldn’t take an ethical stand on “rights” issues when she actively promotes another offender — for profit as well as news/debate.
And lastly, Lubben is now known to NOT BE a valid “SIDE” IN ANY DEBATE. She is a fraud, a liar, and a manipulator who seeks to destroy the very subject matter of Cindi’s own sites.
its a PRIVATELY owned company. they can support any damn thing they want too.
@TravisW – They certainly have every right to do so, yes. And people who oppose that company’s efforts have the right to not patronize that company.
From a certain point-of-view, I agree with Cindi about NOT wanting to financially support people who I strongly disagree with politically. I also appreciate her pointing this out about Chik-Fil-A.
Ever since I learned that the owner of Home Depot was also a Radical Christian Right-Wing Nutcase, I have to bite-the-bullet every time I shop there, but there’s not too many other options. I just also learned that Google decided to donate to the Republican Party because they felt the need to “buy” politicians to help them get whatever they felt they couldn’t get otherwise.
Regarding Michael Whiteacre’s very well stated response about Cindi’s support of Shelly Lubben – I agree completely with his argument.
Cindi and I have been tweeting back and forth about this issue, and I’d like to share some highlights here:
Cindi’s side:
u just don’t get me. I post info/PR from AHF, dotXXX, FSC, PC…. it’s info porners shd c. whether I disagree or agree w/ it
RE ChikfilA i didn’t ask any1 to boycott anything. Just gave info & said what I was doing. Up to all to do as they feel.
My side:
I get you just fine. U and everyone else are free to do as they feel, but you are being inconsistent to the point of hypocrisy.
How can you refuse to patronize a biz b/c of an anti-gay stance yet take advertising $ from someone with the same POV — AND on a site devoted to the industry which she intends to destroy, no less.
If you promoted a charity — like MDA [Muscular Dystrophy Association, hypothetically] – and found out that they were grossly misusing funds, would you continue to promote them?
If Salvation Army or Chabad or any group were misusing funds, & being run by a mentally ill addict who was hurting people in her care, would you continue to accept advertising from them, or promote their agenda? Come on…
Cindi added: “I’ll point out the stmnt ‘keep ur friends close….’ which is a good one.”
Cindi, my question remains, what exactly is the benefit to the readers of your sites, to porn fans or to any reasonable person of having Shelley Lubben kept “close”? People who want to hear her pablum know where to find it.
What benefit accrues to anyone who visits LIB by reading Shelley Lubben’s nonsense? And not just nonsense — LIES!
As Fartz wrote to Shelley’s brother on this site not long ago, “While your imput and participation is appreciated and insightful, you’re really not telling us anything we didn’t already know. LIB is the last group of folks that need to know that Shelley’s full of shit.”
Cindi — why keep her close at all? Why not just report on genuine news items of which she is a relevant part?
I have to agree with my stalking buddy on this one. Cindi she sent this to you for a reason. If she was genuine in her thinking, she would have sent it out to all the blogs not just you.. She choose you for a reason ….you support her, just by helping her. IMO you can’t speak against Chick Fila and support Lubben..Lubben is worse then chickfila, chickfila has had the same politics for as long as I can remember. Think of how many millions they give up each week by not opening there stores. If anything , they should be applauded for not selling out to the dollar. Can you say the sane thing about Lubben ?No. She spends every day attacking your advertisers .. The fact that she thinks ahe can reach out to you and no one else should bother you… While I disagree with you on this tour still my team mate in the gay mafia. Lol
Cindi, if Donny Long had sought to purchase ad space on LIB for PornWikiLeaks, would you have sold it to him? Once it became public knowledge that the site was being used to hurt members of the industry, would you have continued to promote his efforts in the name of “giving people info, and letting them decide”?
Cindi, why not let your valued, long-time readers decide this issue? Ask your readers whether THEY feel there’s any genuine informational value in your continued promotion of Shelley Lubben’s enterprise.
I’m not talking about the reporting of actual NEWS events of which she is a part — I’m talking about the promotion of her phony ministry (which has been called a cult by several members who have escaped it, including anti-porn Christian minister April Garris); her “porn recovery” sham which preys upon, blackmails and HURTS people from the adult industry; her fictionalized book (which most of the people in it call something she conjured up in her own mind); her phony “porn facts” which are used by entities which constitute a genuine threat to your advertisers; her lies, distortions and stereotypes which defame adult industry workers and make their ability to integrate into the civilian world even more difficult; etc…
You can not tell me that Shelly Lubben herself does not believe that that you are promoting her self-serving endeavors — she has taken out ads on your sites and sends you PRs for you to dutifully disseminate. Other sites don’t run with her anti-adult industry pablum — why is that?
In Shelley Lubben’s mind you are promoting her, Cindi, and lending her gravitas and credibility. Every time her lies appear on an adult industry website, you are legitimizing this fraud, con artist and predator.
I’d like to hear from the readers. LukeIsBack readers, do you get anything of value from the promotion of Shelley Lubben on Cindi’s sites that you could not get from the lambasting of Lubben’s idiocy or from seeking out her lies on your own?
I am going to go contrarian here and actually defend Cindi, even though my heart is more in Michael’s corner.
I understand that there are standards that need to be met, and allowing Shelley space here to promote her book and to respond to critics in a blog that does seek to defend the rights and privileges of porn performers and the industry in general may be a bit counterproductive.
But, on the other hand, keep in mind how this blog was created in the first place…out of the legacy of Luke Ford, who wasn’t necessarily the biggest promoter of the adult industry, and in fact was one of the strongest critics without crossing the line into full blown antiporn opposition. This place wasn’t exactly a booster for porn before Cindi took over; this was and still is a place where nearly anyone and everyone can come in and speak their piece regarding how they feel about the industry….whether pro- or anti-.
I understand fully Michael’s point that the porn industry needs to stop giving financial and moral support to those agencies whose main goal is to undermine and destroy it….but on the other hand, if AEE or AVN or Exxxotica or Adultcon wants to give Pink Cross or XXXChurch or any other “Christian” antiporn group space, then why should we force Cindi to mute her personal blog to express only the industry view?? That’s why we have FSC, APHSS, and BPPA, for heaven’s sake.
Actually, having contrarian voices here enlightens and improves the discussions and debates here…and you can’t say that about most forums where only one side gets to control the mike and shut out opposing opinions. As much as we need our own spaces to defend and promote our positions, we have got to accept the fact that there have to be outlets where opposing views can clash, and where disagreements can be fleshed out.
Now, if Cindi had started allowing Shelley space over at Ladiez Night, which is supposed to be a site saluting and celebrating women actively in porn, then I’d be more willing to say that she’s being hypocritical with promoting Shelley Lubben. But for here in this forum, I just see it as getting the inside from all sides and throwing it out there for us wolves and dawgs to chew on.
Part of the beauty of this blog is that it is essentially a free-for-all where everyone can come here and just fire at will, and get fired back on in return. That would be lost if it became only a “industry-only” forum where opponents were summarily banished.
As much as I respect and appreciate my brothers in arms (and in smack) in laying the truth on liars and idiots, I’d rather that Cindi have the final word and the right to run her space as she sees fit. Besides, the best disinfectant to the stank of lies is the fresh air of exposure and truth. Censorship does nothing but allows vultures and vampires to work and corrode from within.
Shelley Lubben may think that she’s getting free promotion here, but everytime someone like me or Michael or Sean or Julie or some other critic of hers responds to her attempts at lies, that “promotion” is effectively reduced to a burning cinder. I’d much rather prefer rapid response than simply kicking her out, which would do more to “promote” her than anything else. In other words, censure her, don’t censor her. Put her down with the truth and the facts; don’t just silence her and give her an excuse to scream about “pro-porn censors”. Make her pay for that “free” promotion by countering her.
As always, my views and my views only. Run with it as you will.
Anthony
@Anthony – I regret to inform you that Shelley Lubben had up until very recently (and maybe still has) a banner ad over at Ladiez Night. It was highly prominent when LIB was down for server issues and forwarded to that other site.
My point is not that Cindi doesn’t have the right to run whatever she wants — of course she does — it’s that to take an ethical stance about Chick-Fil-A while retaining Lubben’s participation is not only hypocritical, it leaves Cindi open to the charge that she’s only in this for the money — that she doesn’t care about the industry at all, just the money. That is not MY charge — I am trying to relieve Cindi of the burden of that charge, but she seems unwilling to evade it.
I have to agree with Michael, though you are right, Anthony. Stated so well because, you, Michael and I know that we get no voice on Lubben’s blog or YouTube Channel, while we actually approve opposition to our views and go back and forth with these people no matter how ridiculous their arguments, at times.
I felt the same way I did about the Chick-Fil_A sentiment when I saw Cindi post an angry tweet about Juliette Lewis making a statement about not being a porn fan, and that it insulted her porn audience here. I couldn’t figure how that’s insulting, but extremely cordial anti-porn posts from Lubben are “okay”.
On the other hand, I’m sure Lubben doesn’t send info to Cindi and say, ‘Post this bitch!’ lol She’s probably very polite and courteous, and why would Cindi oppose that, right? But, again, it’s nice to see a conversation about it seeming completely contradictory to oppose anti gay and anti porn groups and people and then roll out the red carpet for Shelley Lubben.
And I saw the Ladiez Night Lubben banner, too. I wasn’t expecting it, either. Kind of a smack between the eyes because it was that creepy purple picture she used on her “rap album”. It doesn’t appear to be there right now, though.
I do appreciate being able to state my thoughts here.
Let’s go back to my original complaint:
Cindi wrote, vis-à-vis Chick-Fil-A’s anti-homosexual position, “I can’t support a company that doesn’t support equal rights for all.”
Setting aside all her anti-porn industry pablum for a moment, Shelley Lubben believes that homosexuality is an abomination, and promotes the very same type of “Exodus” ministries as Chick-Fil-A / WinShape. She believes that homosexuals can and must be cured of their gayness. Lubben equates homosexuals with rapists, child molesters, drug dealers — and porn stars.
Yet she’s welcome to advertise on and submit items to LIB.
Then there’s Shelley Lubben’s racist remarks (some, but not all, of which can be found in The Devil and Shelley Lubben), and the support she receives from white supremacist and anti-semitic groups (groups which she has never, to my knowledge, publicly renounced).
Yet she’s invited to spread her hateful swill, counter to the interests of the adult industry — or any free thinking individuals.
Except Mike South, of course, who thinks she performs a valuable service. To which I retort, follow the money, friends.
Who benefits if mainstream American porn should suffer?
Is Chick-Fil-A any good? I mean, it’s just chicken patties right?
Is there any youtube videos of this “rap” that Shelley performs? I’m dying to add to my collection of horrible “rap” CD’s. It’ll be right in there with MachoMan Randy Savage and The firefighters, which was a free christian rap cassette tape that they were distributing for free in the early 90’s. You just called a number and they sent you the cassette. I remember the dudes on the cover looking quite gay.
Haha. I found a pic.
http://guyism.com/lifestyle/the-6-worst-christian-bands-of-all-time.html/attachment/the-firefighters
Chick Fila is fucking phenomenal…pricey for fast food…
there’s only like two or three in my location, and they’re at least a shot down the interstate a bit. If one pops up close, I’ll have to try it. I eat to taste yummy food, not “support” anyone.
Chick-Fil-A is extremely delicious, imo. Which is why I wrote about this in February, accompanied by some depression. lol
@Fartz – Sadly there seem to be no YouTube videos of Shelley performing her “rap” numbers. She’s a studio act — like The Beatles after 1966.