Chick-fil-A Denies Fake Facebook Accusations

ChickCowsFacebook found a new member yesterday in a person claiming to be called "Abby Farle" and who promptly began using the social media site to defend Chick-fil-A, a company currently on the defensive after CEO Dan Cathy claimed marriage equality would bring "God's wrath" upon America.

The timing of the creation of Farley's Facebook page —  which specifically addresses the story's latest twist: Chick-fil-A's feud with the LGBT-friendly Jim Henson Company — had some people wondering if Chick-fil-A had made the page with the express purpose of defending itself. The company denies such accusations.

"I can confirm that Chick-fil-A has not created a false Facebook page of any kind. Our official corporate Facebook page continues to be our only one," said spokesperson Tiffany Greenway.

This leaves two other possibilities, as posited by Gizmodo's Casey Chan: "There's a chance that this could all be a stunt to shame Chick-fil-A—or an overzealous supporter." Or Chick-fil-A is lying.

Comments

  1. Dave says

    Well, there’s a third, more plausible possibility. An outside PR or marketing firm contracted by Chick-Fil-A could have made the fake page and their corporate statement could still be true technically.

  2. DanSwon says

    Lies. And what the hell has a fast food restaurant got to do with taking a stand on same-sex marriage? Considering that we are slowly but surely winning that fight and hearts and minds are progressively being changed all the time, it seems this business has doomed itself. In years to come this may be seen as the stupidest PR disaster in business history.

  3. Alex Parrish says

    Easy call; Fundamental Christianinsts ALWAYS lie. Lying is a basic part of their philosophy, beginning with what they really believe about scripture. However, they live in denial of their state of cognitive dissonance, so lying is second-nature to them.

  4. Mike says

    Of course they are denying they did it, that is what antigay Christians do today, they say or do something to attack gays and then lie or blame it on others to try and get out of it. It is all part of the psychological war they are waging against LGBT people. Next they will says it is is a conspiracy or all in you head or some such thing to confuse you. It will do you good to learn about the psychological warfare the Christians are using today to openly and secretly attack LGBT people and carry out their propaganda war on gays to destroy them.

  5. Inside says

    There’s been no secret about Chick-Fil-A’s Christian beliefs. Those that are surprised aren’t paying attention.

    A better question is why the Jim Henson Company got in bed with them in the first place?

  6. Jesse says

    They created a phony PROFILE not a PAGE. Therefore, they aren’t lying when they say PAGE. They are just being dishonest and predictably disingenuous.

  7. anon says

    I came to post what I see that Dave said. To me, the most likely scenario is that an outside PR firm hired by Chick-fil-A created the profile. So Chick-fil-A is technically not “lying” by saying they didn’t create this fake profile. I don’t believe one of their overzealous supporters created this profile. Chick-fil-A supporters have been very vocal supporting the company under their real names.
    _______
    “Well, there’s a third, more plausible possibility. An outside PR or marketing firm contracted by Chick-Fil-A could have made the fake page and their corporate statement could still be true technically.”

  8. Michael says

    Is anyone buying this? 1st off, even if it was a PR firm with ties to CFA, it’s still CFA.

    However, let me get this right. According to CFA, some John Doe went out of his way to get a stock photo, create a bogus FB account just to defend CFA? John Doe would first have to pay the fee to have the ability to use the stock photo. Why would JD just use his own profile or swipe some random picture from the internet?

    The most obnoxious aspect is CFA, claiming to be so morally superior, broke 20% of the most sever sins in doing so and doesn’t have any problems with it. Lying? Check. Baring false witness against thy Neighbor? Check.

    When it comes to having balls, CFA is definitely the Chicken of corporations.

  9. Michael says

    btw, it is beyond classic how quickly this is spiraling out of control and severely going downhill for Corporate Chicken. Lying about the Henson toys, lying about this FB page, yadda, yadda, yadda.

    A Big Mac is sounding better and better all the time. McD’s $1 chicken sandwich isn’t bad either. The sad part about it is every time I went into CFA there were a lot of cute twinkie gay boys working there. I can only imagine what they’re going through.

  10. Tony Luna says

    For those opposed to a fast food chain expressing thier deeply held beliefs publicly, I am guessing you do not have the same issue with Ben and Jerry whose “Hubby Hubby” flavor expresses their deeply held personal beliefs. Do you?

  11. RONTEX says

    @Tony Luna, I don’t have a problem with a business expressing their political views since I can choose not to purchase their product. What I DO have a problem with is that these businesses then cry and stomp their feet when people disagree with them and say they are being bullied. Call them an effing whaaaa-mbulance, I’m sick of their hate camouflaged by the “word of God”.

  12. Josh Knight says

    @Rontex said…I’m sick of their hate camouflaged by the “word of God”.

    Have you not see or read the pure and vile hate being spewed at Chic-fIl-A for expressing thier personal beliefs?

    I find it quite ironic that those who espouse tolerance are only tolerant until they meet someone with a differing view point..then all “tolerance” is thrown off the table and the vile hatred and homophobic accsations begin to fly.”

  13. DeeperStill says

    @TONY LUNA(tic)

    When your “deeply held beliefs” includes actively trying to make some people second class, and not as worthy as “the rest”, then yes, we have issues with that “belief”. Ben & Jerry’s deeply held beliefs are INCLUSIVE, not exclusive. I know you might have a problem seeing the difference. That would require a brain. And a heart as well.

  14. RONTEX says

    @Josh Knight, this is more than just a differing point of view, I’m all for active discussion on issues and have many Christian friends who don’t espouse this bigotry cloaked in the name of Jesus. Chic-Fil-A-Holes are actively working to deny and/or take away rights of an entire class of people by their donations to NOM, etc. This is not a discussion at the dinner table, they are using their business as a political tool. Imagine if they were working behind the scenes to deny rights to African Americans, or the Jewish community, it’s the SAME THING.

  15. Josh Knight says

    @Rontex: “I have Christian friends who don’t espouse this bigotry cloaked in the name of Jesus.”

    Jesus did espouse that “for this reason, a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.” Agree or not, he said it. There literally is no cloaking.

    “They using their business as a political tool. to deny and/or take away rights of an entire class of people by their donations to NOM, etc.”

    So if I support traditonal marriage, I am a biggot?

    “they are using their business as a political tool.”

    As is Ben and Jerry’s – and I disagree with them deeplpy but I do not call them biggoted…I just don’t buy their ice cream.”

  16. vanndean says

    @Tony Luna, Ben and Jerry’s Hubby, Hubby flavor of ice cream caused a bit of a stir and some rather wild comments on Yahoo several months ago. There was also a call for a boycott of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream. That idea sort of took a nose dive when many people discovered that B and J’s is now owned by a multi-national corporation. To be effective the boycott would have to have been an international effort and would have involved over 100 name brand products. The idea fizzled rapidly, but the most important thing which caused a fizzle of the boycott was that Hubby, Hubby was NEVER sold in the United States. It was only marketed in the United Kingdom.

  17. Josh Knight says

    I note you never touched the quote from Jesus. Why not?

    You claim we are cloaking in Jesus name but he “literally” said marriage is between a husband and a wife.

    You charge of cloaking, then, is baseless.

    Tolerance or toleration = a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one’s on;

    “I respect your right to believe that marriage can be between a man and a man or women. Though I disagree, I RESPECT your right to your oppinion and you are not less than for it.

    On the other hand, I am STUPID and HEARTLESS AND BRAINLESS for expressing mine.

    Dude – what you are guilty of – literally – is religious persecution.

    Tolerance works both ways.

  18. Josh Knight says

    I respect your right to express your oppinion. Even if you are commiting religious religiou by attacking me for expressing my faith beliefs.

    As far as your accusation that Christinas are “cloaking” thier bliefs in the name of Jesus, I noticed you did not touch the fact that Jesus literally said marriage is teh union between husband and wife.

    Your accusation then, while emotionally charged, is baseless.

  19. BEAHBEAH says

    See, this is the issue Josh Knight, anti gay marriage believers want their cake and want to eat it too. You can’t have it both ways.

    You can’t say that you’re against gay marriage and then say you respect gays. You can’t say you’re against gay marriage and then say that you’re not anti-gay. By saying that you’re against gay marriage, you’re saying that we are not equal to you. So yes, it is anti-gay, it is bigotry, it is discriminatory and it is intolerant to say that gays shouldn’t be able to get married.

    And bigotry and discrimination are not “opinions” that are tolerated in this country. Do you have the right to say them? Yes. Are they tolerated by the media and large portions of the population, no.

  20. tinkerbelle says

    Not to change the subject, but is Chick-fil-a known only for chicken sandwiches (we don’t have this in Europe… yet)? And is the illustration above what is on the “fake” facebook page? Because I’m kind of wondering why there are cows in this image. What am I missing here?

  21. RONTEX says

    @ Josh, Troll say what? You are so desperately trying to equate Marriage Equality with Religious Persecution when they are completely different things. If I was trying to make a Church of any denomination perform a same sex marriage, I can see how that could be seen as religious persecution. However, what we are demanding is marriage equality under the law and all of the rights and responsibilities that come with that.

  22. BEAHBEAH says

    As for you mentioning Jesus. We do not live in a theocracy. There is a separation of church and state in this country and your Bible has no say in law or public policy. So take your PERSONAL religious beliefs to your home and your church and stop trying to make everyone else live by them.

    If you want to live in a theocracy, feel free to move to the middle east. They kills gays there, which I’m sure makes you happy.

  23. Josh Knight says

    @Tikerbelle…they only make chicke. The cows are their ad campaign – usually holding signs that say “eat more chicken” (in other words, eat at chik fil a and save the cows)

  24. Josh Knight says

    Let’s stay focussed dude…your charge was that Christians are hiding behind Jesus as . I proved you were wrong so you changed the subject.

    Ok – here we go – separation of church and state does NOT mean I cannot express my religious views. It means teh government cannot formally create a “national religion” (Like the formal Church of England).

    In fact, our constitution GUARANTEES me the right to be free from religious persecution – which you are commiting by telling me to shut up and not express my religious belies.

    Lastly Separation of Church and State realtes to faith and GOVERNMENT. Not Faith and Corproations (nice try). That, is protected under the First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech 😉

  25. DeeperStill says

    “On the other hand, I am STUPID and HEARTLESS AND BRAINLESS for expressing mine.”

    Yes. And while you’re at it, Josh, add moronic and delusional…

    There’s a difference between expressing your opinions, and working actively to force people to live by your CHOSEN belief. Gay people did not start a war against so called “christians”. The so called “christians” started a war against gays. Believe in any religion you want, just don’t expect us to “sit in the back of the bus”, because some fairytale book tells you we should. There’s freedom FROM religion as well. And marriage is NOT a christian institution, no matter how hard you pathetic, lowlife haters try to hijack it. Marriage predates chistianity, and has changed several times too.

    Don’t like gay marriage? Don’t have one. It’s that simple. Yet, it seems, still not simple enough for you to grasp.

  26. Sean in Dallas says

    The quote about a man leaving his parents and cleaving to his wife has been taken out of context, of course.

    The context (Mark 10) was whether a man should be allowed to divorce his wife. The question was posed to Jesus by the Pharisees. And the answer Jesus gave was that Moses allowed divorce only because the people’s hearts were hard. However, Jesus felt that one doesn’t tear apart what God put together (the marriage).

    So why the hell aren’t the Christians screaming about divorce? Instead, they spend their time and energy focusing on gay marriage–something that is never addressed in the New Testament.

    Jesus did not literally say marriage is the union between husband and wife. Or even figuratively. He did say he wasn’t for divorcing your wife.

    Regardless: marriage is a mutable concept. It has had several meanings in its past; to say that it hasn’t is to be willfully ignorant of human history.

  27. Josh Knight says

    I’m Catholic. We belive divorce is worng and not the right answer. And believe me, we are religiously persecuted for that belief too.

  28. Tanoka says

    @ John Knight:
    I respect your right to be stupid, heartless and brainless. You also have a right to be a bigot.
    But other people have the right to call you out on these things, and tell you to shut up and take your bigotry elsewhere.
    Nobody’s stopping you from grabbing your soap box and go searching for another street corner. So why aren’t you doing just that?

    A little tip for you, on your way: If you can’t make an argument against SSM without invoking your religion, you are truly a pathetic bigot.

  29. Josh Knight says

    Jesus did not literally say marriage is the union between husband and wife. Or even figuratively. He did say he wasn’t for divorcing your wife.

    To your point, yes, he was talking about divorce, – which is the legal disolution of what? Marriage. And just waht did he say about disolving a marriage then? He said “a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife”

    He did not say “a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his husband” or “a woman shall leave her parents and cleave to her wife.”

    Honestly, I respect you for disagreeing – you are not “brainless, heartless or stupid” – you are someone with a differeing viewpoint.

    Again, according to you, becuase I disagree with you – I am “Heartless, brainless and stupid.”

  30. DeeperStill says

    Actually, Josh. I was the one saying you were Heartless, brainless and stupid. (Stop acting like you are, if you want people to think you’re not).

    I never discussed this jesus dribble with you. I don’t believe in it. It’s pointless to discuss the bible, or any other religious book for that matter, when we are dealing with basic human rights. Keep your faith, I really don’t care. I hope it brings you joy. Just don’t ever tell me to live by your crazy rules.

    That’s all. Bye, bigot.

  31. Sean in Dallas says

    Again, Jesus was talking about divorce. He was not trying to hammer out the definition of marriage. If the definition were that important, I’m sure he would have spent more time discussing it.

    Why?

    Because in Jesus’ time, what is today called homosexuality was a common behavior. Had Jesus found it as unsavory as he did divorce, he would have come right out and said it without pussyfooting around.

    Getting the final, written-in-stone definition of marriage from this single passage is religious malpractice.

  32. sacred scripture told me so says

    Christians are always surprised when they get slapped back because they assume they are the ruling majority. Who would dare disagree with their god-approved pronouncements? Supported by ancient books written in strange symbols. How dare ANYONE speak against their pronouncements?

  33. john says

    Chick fil a constantly sues for copyright infringement with cease and desist letters = specifically the farmer shirtmaker who printed shirts that said “eat more kale”. So if this isn’t created by them then someone else is doing it, and if chick fil a doesn’t send them a cease and desist, then they can’t do the same to others who infringe.

  34. 2Fathers says

    Josh Knight you will loose this culture war. We are not going to back down. Our LGBT community is stronger than ever before..and OF COURSE a company like Ben & Jerrys won’t get a massive backlash for being pro LGBT. That is a GOOD quality to have and should never be compared to being a homophobe. They are two completely different things. Hence why Kraft supporting equality didn’t get much backlash at all. Your side is losing, we will win this. Go grab a cross and pray reallyyy hard little boy

  35. Icebloo says

    Keep up the pressure everyone ! You are doing a great job !
    The man at the top is going to be pushed like Humpty Dumpty when the company profits start falling. Franchisees are already speaking out against the CEO moron. We just need to keep going with our boycott.

Leave A Reply