Chick-fil-A | Gay Marriage | News | Vincent Gray | Washington DC

Washington D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray Calls Chick-fil-A 'Hate Chicken'

Washington D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray has made his views about Chick-fil-A known, on Twitter:

Gray"Given my longstanding strong support for LGBT rights & marriage equality, I would not support #hatechicken"

The WaPo reports:

Earlier Friday, Gray declined to take a stand on the company, saying he needed more time to review its position on gay rights. But administration officials noted Gray has been a strong supporter of gay rights. In 2010, when he was council chairman, Gray helped legalize same-sex marriage. Last month, as mayor, Gray signed into law what he called one of the nation’s toughest anti bullying laws.

Gray waded into the Chick-fil-A debate even though the company does not have a big presence in the city and has no known plans for an expansion. Though the company’s Web site lists nearly two dozen locations in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs, the only location in the District is on the grounds of Catholic University.

Gray later responded to Twitter users about his statement, adding: "What's embarrassing about supporting equal rights for your gay fellow Americans?...This is about more than their CEO's personal opinions. They also give hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-gay groups...I said I oppose them, but cannot legally bar them...Because they give significant amounts of $$ to organizations that actively oppose equal rights for gay people."

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Everyone is weighing in on this one issue. VOTING is what makes a difference possible - NOT PC tweets or flapping gums.

    Posted by: M. Scott Hernandez | Jul 29, 2012 11:05:03 AM

  2. They need to change the name to antigay Christian who give money to haters chicken Fil A.

    Posted by: Mike | Jul 29, 2012 11:22:09 AM

  3. "The D.C. mayor is violating my First Amendment rights" in 3...2...1

    Posted by: neptune | Jul 29, 2012 11:26:50 AM

  4. @MScott: Why is it "PC" (rather than, say, rational) to speak out against a company who gives millions for the purpose of denying you equal protection under the law? And why can't one speak out and also vote?

    Everyone should be speaking out against Chick-Fil-A's extreme values. Kudos to the mayor for adding his voice to the chorus.

    Too many people are more concerned with Chick-Fil-A's constitutional rights than our own. No one has yet violated their rights. Yet they've worked hard towards violating ours for years. Finally, they're being called on it.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jul 29, 2012 11:56:16 AM

  5. im right with you chick-fil-a

    Posted by: becky | Jul 29, 2012 12:00:31 PM

  6. Then why are you here, Becky? Wouldn't you feel more at hom at Free Republic?

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jul 29, 2012 12:52:42 PM

  7. I've never been a fan of chic fil a myself so my money isn't going to them. However, on another note has anyone noticed that towleroads site is no covered in ads for anti gay candidates from the tea party and republican party? If we should not give money to anti gay companies like chic fil a, then should we be ok in taking ad money from the likes of the anti candidates to advertise on sites like towleroad?

    Posted by: Geared in Austin | Jul 29, 2012 1:29:54 PM

  8. .This is about more than their CEO's personal opinions. They also give hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-gay groups...I said I oppose them, but cannot legally bar them...Because they give significant amounts of $$ to organizations that actively oppose equal rights for gay people.


    Why doesn't the mainstream media quote this every time someone says it's about some "interview"?

    The "charitable arm" of CFA has given $5 million or more to anti-gay groups since 2003. That's twice what Bezos gave for marriage, and his contribution doesn't deprive anyone of rights.

    Posted by: KevinVT | Jul 29, 2012 1:41:59 PM

  9. Geared in Austin: Ads on this site are dynamic. That means they are tailored to the content appearing on the page. Increasingly, ads also use the browser's history to display ads that might interest you. For example, if you recently searched for airfare, ads for travel sites will appear.

    This type of Internet advertising works on general/mainstream sites. But, it can lead to inappropriate ads on sites like Towleroad. The debate on if sites like this one should take homophobic money is one that rarely happens.

    Posted by: alex | Jul 29, 2012 5:16:20 PM

  10. @Geared in Austin and ALEX.... I say take the money from the homophobes for ads since they are just wasting their money on this site anyway....

    Posted by: Tim NC | Jul 29, 2012 8:25:57 PM

  11. All these grandstanding government officials should just shut up about Chick-Fil-A. The Cathy's have the right to their intollerant views and the right to express them. Individual who disagree have the right to stop going to their chicken joints and if they choose to organize boycotts of Chick-Fil-A. Government officials should shut the f**k up!

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 1:36:28 AM

  12. @ANDREW

    You really need to go back to your history books and know how Nazi Germany began.

    Posted by: Felix | Jul 30, 2012 1:42:18 AM

  13. keep saying that in every post. ALL you contribute to any post on this site is "homophobes have a right to be a homophobe" who said they don't? WE'RE RESPONDING TO IT, loudly, boldly, agressively. Stop being a one trick pony you fool. ALL you have to contribute on here is "homophobes have a right to be homophobes"
    THAT'S ALL YOU GOT! In every post. How many brain cells you got on you?

    Posted by: Real Talk | Jul 30, 2012 3:02:18 AM

  14. Andrew,
    And guess what? These government officials have every right to respond and say they are against Chik Fil A. Government officials are NOT constitutionally barred from expressing their disdain for a company. You are no constitutional scholar, so please don't pretend you are one, when a basic right goes over your head.

    Posted by: James | Jul 30, 2012 3:03:36 AM

  15. @ Andrew

    And we, along with elected officials, have every right and entitlement to have our rebuttal to Chik Fil A. Be it in petitions, protests or anti Chik Fil A campaigns, or elected officials stating they don't like what the company stands for, we all have a right to respond. Sorry the kitchen is getting too heated for your ilk. I know you'd like us to not have a backbone, but those days are over. Today, LGBT and our allies are poroud to stand tall and speak up for our equality and call out bigots for their bigotry.

    Posted by: Steve-ATL | Jul 30, 2012 3:05:26 AM

  16. I support ANYONE who speaks out against Chik Fil A, who is a company that donated millions to a campaign that contributed to the DEATHS of LGBT abroad- notably in Africa. They are directly and indirectly funding those who destroy us. MORE POWER to anyone who speaks against Chik Fil A.

    Posted by: 2EastCoasters | Jul 30, 2012 3:07:28 AM

  17. I find it amusing how the conservatives get all bent out of shape when politicians voice their disdain against bigots or bigoted companies, but then will go postal if they don't have a right to protest a funeral. Freedom of speech enables us to call out a prejudice company for what it is, boycott them, and scream, shout and make a scene against their bigoted ways. Don't like it? don't be a bigot.

    Posted by: Lisa | Jul 30, 2012 3:08:52 AM

  18. @ FELIX: Nazi Germany began when the german Weimar Republic didn't crack down on extremist right wingers expressing there views? Interesting misreading of history.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 6:01:25 AM

  19. @Real Talk: Reread what I said. The intollerant have the right to express there views. Individuals have the right to reject those views by not spending their money in those chicken joints. Groups of individuals have the right to organize protests.(Boycotts) Government officials however should shut the f**k up. Government should not intervene in this debate. And I don't take lightly someone who does not understand the American concept of freedom of speech calling me a fool.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 6:08:38 AM

  20. @James: I never claimed to be a constitutional scholar. I do know how dangerous it can be when government office holders threaten individuals because of their stated beliefs. In case I didn't make it clear, I abhor everything the Cathy family stands for and have never and will never eat in one of their chicken joints. However as a veteran and regular American citizen, I stand by their right to hold and express abhorent opinions.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 6:14:28 AM

  21. @Steve-Atl: Who the f**K are you talking too? I am a lifelong liberal democrat. The first demonstration I participated in was in 1964 sponsored by the SCLC when I was a college student in D.C. I have spent my life championing progressive causes. As a Navy veteran, I believe deeply in our right to freedom of speech even ugly speech. I do believe that individuals should respond pro or con to the intollerant speech of the Cathy family. However it is very dangerous when government officials use or threaten to use their power against individuals for exercising their constitutioan freedoms.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 6:24:50 AM

  22. @Lisa: I agree with everything you say about individuals or groups of citizens protesting against abhorent views. My point is that government officials, who have sworn to protect the constitution, have no right threatening to use their power against individuals with whom they disagree.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 6:31:27 AM

  23. The Mayor of D C might spend some of his extra time dealing with the murder rate in his city. Or dealing with the fact that most of his inner city schools don't educate chidren.If D C was a foreign nation it would be classified as a failed state.

    Posted by: andrew | Jul 30, 2012 9:41:41 AM

  24. Whatever Andrew.

    Posted by: Luke | Jul 30, 2012 11:05:59 AM

Post a comment


« «Heath Ledger's Inspiration for The Joker Discovered? - VIDEO« «