Jennifer - Great article. I happen to agree. Nice to see some wholesome opinions on this topic.

great piece but around this formerly great and proud city, county and state, instead of being bludgeoned with anything remotely connected with love, we're bludgeoned with bribery, extortion and silence from men and women paid to look out for the peoples interest. this piece is way above and totally lost to the heads of the people you are trying to reach out to as they are only concerned with saving and keeping their own squalid butts in office.on the other hand, maybe if we had people with life skills at or on beacon hill and city hall things might be different but, they ain't. not even close. ma

Happily for me boycotting Chick=fil-a's is kind of a non-issue. I don't like the food. Then again I don't like any of the chain restaurants so I guess I'm a food elitist. However, if I did like their food I wouldn't boycott them over this or almost any other issue. The owner can think what he wants. I don't care. I suppose if he stuck crosses in every window I might skip it out of fear of melting, but beyond that, who cares. The author is right, sometimes it's not worth all the noise and can be counter=productive. The owner wishes to be some kind of religious throwback? As long as he's not stoning people he can have at it.

I agree operationally with Ms. Graham's approach but practically this is how the camel gets under the tent. Just substitute women or minorities as the proxy for the gay community and it becomes clearer what the problem is. What if Mr. Cathy advocated for a lower position in society for females or minorities? If he understood he could not economically pull this off in his own stores but instead put his considerable earnings to fund organizations to keep these groups down, how does that work? So yes let him have his stores but people are also allowed to vote with their feet if he uses his profits to limit other people's legitimate choices. The overwhelming success of his franchises shows that this has had little impact on reversing his viewpoint. Other peaceful and legal actions may be more effective. Just as he uses his money to bolster a hurtful viewpoint potential customers can deprive him of the means to do so.

What a bunch of insensitive, minimizing of issue clap trap. Let's see, because a company is using the profits they make to ensure that our gay neighbors are discriminated against those opposed do not have a sense of humor? There is nothing funny about paying taxes on healthcare benefits because the Feds do not recognize your marriage, or being denied access to your children if your gay spouse dies because your years long relationship is not recognized. This is not some philosophical debate, it is an issue that destroys lives very day so stop acting like this is some funny lighthearted discussion for Sunday morning.

"stevo" I agree with you in principle but I would point out that sometimes if we react to everything and everyone the acting or the protest losses its punch. Kind of like, "familiarity breeds contempt". If folks want to express their displeasure with their feet, that's good but I sometimes think we need to pick better fights.

Boston needs a Chick-fil-A? Give me a break.

Where's the love in here? Your kids love their nuggets? You love their funny ad? Many, many people here love their gay family and friends. The money you spend in "loving" their nuggets supports the attempt to create hate-filled public policies. I really don't see the love, or the humor, in that.

Good restaurant review. next time we are in the area we will have to sample the goods at chic-fil-a's.

I suspect Jennifer Graham has a little blind spot when it comes to religion. She is the same author who wrote a Globe article that told us that the teen who fought against a prayer banner in the Cranston High School didn't have a good enough reason for insisting it be taken down. So, since discrimination based on religion doesn't bother her, apparently it shouldn't bother us.

It is easier to express our displeasure with our feet now that Menino's principled stand has made the Cathys' views public.

No way can someone's right to chicken compare to someone's right to marriage.

Where's the love in here? Your kids love their nuggets? You love their funny ad? Many, many people here love their gay family and friends. The money you spend in "loving" their nuggets supports the attempt to create hate-filled public policies. I really don't see the love, or the humor, in that.

If you believe in first amendment rights, then he is entitled to his RELIGIOUS beliefs. Should we poll every president and boycott all businesses that don't hold your beliefs? It wouldn't be a debate if there weren't 2 sides.

Boston doesn't need Chick-fil-A. Nobody needs Chick-fil-A. Nobody needs any fast food restaurant for that matter, especially a chain of restaurants that works to deny people human rights and privileges.

If corporations are "people", as Mitt Romney says, then don't we have a right to shun those people who encourage citizens to discrimminate against others? Talk to them, yes, even love them, but when they insist on abusing others by not conferring equal rights on all citizens, then boycott them until they just serve chicken without the side dishes of exclusion and arrogance.

I can't help but think this was a huge PR campaign for Chik Fil A. CFA wants to come to Boston,KNOWS that their corporate policy on gays and gay marriage is NOT going to play well in Boston, SO CEO is ALL over the media,lots of free publicity generated with blanketing their concepts of biblical marriage etc.with the expected liberal pushback.If Mr Cathy really wanted to enlarge their East Coast market share,they would have opened a restaurant in MA with no publicity or religious fanfare. He wants to have his cake and eat it too, wants the MA $$ but also gets to chide MA liberals with his "superior" religious concepts. I applaud Mayor Menino for his stand and his right to stand up to bigotry with a side of smug self-righteousness!

Clear distinction between a business that uses its profits to deny equal rights to the people that the CEO's personal beliefs say don't deserve them, and a business that just does its business and keeps the CEO's personal opinion on gay marriage out of the business.

Chick-fil-A's quite prominent here in FL and its execs are routinely in local business council meetings. I have no problem with their having a corporate culture but they do foster "attitude" that seems to limit their employees who don't 'fit in.' As for using corporate money for an anti-gay cause, I believe that Chick-fil-A's money influence is a pittance compared to what the Mormon Church spent in Calif to sway its election. Now THERE's influence -- it wasn't money earned selling sandwiches it was money donated in the guise of "charitable contributions."

Jennifer, Northeastern (my employer) did not ban Chick-fil-A. It rescinded an invitation. We're talking about a closed student center with a limited amount of space. Doesn't it make more sense to give that space to a restaurant that's more inclusive?

Jennifer, you're wrong.

"radical attack on wholesomeness"..... Wow! Not on your A game today. Hate and bigotry against gay people does not equate to "wholesomeness". I don't "hate" Chick-a-Fil, and I doubt that many of the other progressive posters do either, but I don't like bigotry and applaud politicians who call it out. The Cathys can say whatever they want, practice their religion as they want, but if they fund anti-gay activism with their corporate profits, then I will exercise my right to eat somewhere else. BTW, "tree huggers". Really? Is that your take on environmental awareness? Have a wholesome Sunday....

I appreciate that clarification on an issue of which I was unaware. And I agree.

"Corporate punishment ... does nothing but divide and irritate"?? Have you ever studied the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s? There would still be two separate water fountains and sitting in the back of the bus if we listened to people like you. That corporations make money off of -- and even employ -- individuals against whom they harbor invidiously discriminatory animus doesn't make a good argument for "feeling the love". Why don't you put down your pen and pick up a book, and read some history, honey?