Die on the Chick-Fil-A Hill?

It's interesting that you inclination is to think she's lying or misrepresenting her position.

The administration hand out talking points for all administrators to use. She was given an official party line and decided she couldn't betray her personal values.

Watch an interview with her - she's quite level headed and doesn't trash the university. She clearly explains what she had a problem with and why after some consideration decided she couldn't be part of the party line. She didn't make a big fuss and isn't demanding anything.
It's still an interesting hill to die on, though, and she's going back to a faculty position. She's still employed by this school, who asked her to "compromise her faith and Christian values."

It seems like there was a better way to respond to the talking points than just resigning. If someone asked her why Chick-fil-A wasn't going to be allowed on campus, couldn't she just say "no comment" or "the school says that Chick-fil-A's values conflict with their values?" That'd simply be saying nothing at all, or just repeating the school's claim. Did the talking points demand that if she was asked about the decision, she must repudiate Chick-fil-A's beliefs (which are the same as hers) and say that Chick-fil-A is wrong or something?
 
It's still an interesting hill to die on, though, and she's going back to a faculty position. She's still employed by this school, who asked her to "compromise her faith and Christian values."

It seems like there was a better way to respond to the talking points than just resigning. If someone asked her why Chick-fil-A wasn't going to be allowed on campus, couldn't she just say "no comment" or "the school says that Chick-fil-A's values conflict with their values?" That'd simply be saying nothing at all, or just repeating the school's claim. Did the talking points demand that if she was asked about the decision, she must repudiate Chick-fil-A's beliefs (which are the same as hers) and say that Chick-fil-A is wrong or something?

I can't speak for her but in an interview she felt that by accepting the party line she was betraying her own values and it was not the talking points per se but the larger statement indicating CFA's values were not evolved sufficiently that she took issue with. Sounds like she didn't feel comfortable being part of a leadership team that openly suggested (her interpretation) that having strong Christian values was not in line with the university's values.

She's not dying on any hill or making demands or seeking publicity. She made a personal choice that made it into the news. I don't see the issue with her action and admire her making a value's driven choice.
 
I can't speak for her but in an interview she felt that by accepting the party line she was betraying her own values and it was not the talking points per se but the larger statement indicating CFA's values were not evolved sufficiently that she took issue with. Sounds like she didn't feel comfortable being part of a leadership team that openly suggested (her interpretation) that having strong Christian values was not in line with the university's values.

She's not dying on any hill or making demands or seeking publicity. She made a personal choice that made it into the news. I don't see the issue with her action and admire her making a value's driven choice.
Your thoughtful, reasoned discourse has no place here!
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
I can't speak for her but in an interview she felt that by accepting the party line she was betraying her own values and it was not the talking points per se but the larger statement indicating CFA's values were not evolved sufficiently that she took issue with. Sounds like she didn't feel comfortable being part of a leadership team that openly suggested (her interpretation) that having strong Christian values was not in line with the university's values.

She's not dying on any hill or making demands or seeking publicity. She made a personal choice that made it into the news. I don't see the issue with her action and admire her making a value's driven choice.
I guess it's just a matter of how you look at it. If I were her, I wouldn't view what occurred as accepting, or being required to accept, the party line. Even if she was given "talking points" on how to handle the conversation. As long as they weren't going to require her to repudiate or speak negatively of her own values, I don't see why she felt compelled to resign her position. In response to the talking points, she either could say nothing, or just repeat the university's reasoning as to why they didn't allow Chick-fil-A. As far as we know, she wasn't being required to say that the university's values were the right ones, or that her's were wrong. She could simply just repeat what the school claimed. That's what "talking points" are anyway. The school never said that Chick-fil-A's or her values were wrong or bad; they said Chick-fil-A's values didn't align with theirs.

It shouldn't come as a surprise to her that the leadership team of a private school in New Jersey had progressive social views. She had to have at least suspected that the school, by and large, wouldn't be a big fan of a Christian worldview for the entire time she worked there, right? Did she become aware of this only when they said a Chick-fil-A wouldn't be allowed on campus?
 
I can count on one hand how many times I've eaten a Chick-Fil-A product. It's okay, but nothing I would go out and buy unless I just happened to be really hungry and there was one next to me without 12000 people in line. I really don't get the appeal of their food, on the other hand I really don't get the appeal to most fast food or Applebee's type places either.
What chardonnay do you prefer to pair with your chicken sandwiches normally?
 
I guess it's just a matter of how you look at it. If I were her, I wouldn't view what occurred as accepting, or being required to accept, the party line. Even if she was given "talking points" on how to handle the conversation. As long as they weren't going to require her to repudiate or speak negatively of her own values, I don't see why she felt compelled to resign her position. In response to the talking points, she either could say nothing, or just repeat the university's reasoning as to why they didn't allow Chick-fil-A. As far as we know, she wasn't being required to say that the university's values were the right ones, or that her's were wrong. She could simply just repeat what the school claimed. That's what "talking points" are anyway. The school never said that Chick-fil-A's or her values were wrong or bad; they said Chick-fil-A's values didn't align with theirs.

It shouldn't come as a surprise to her that the leadership team of a private school in New Jersey had progressive social views. She had to have at least suspected that the school, by and large, wouldn't be a big fan of a Christian worldview for the entire time she worked there, right? Did she become aware of this only when they said a Chick-fil-A wouldn't be allowed on campus?

They said the values had not sufficiently evolved - sounds like they were saying the values were wrong.

She's an individual that can think for herself - I honestly don't see why people are suggesting she's wrong for doing this or worse, lying about her reasons.
 
I can count on one hand how many times I've eaten a Chick-Fil-A product. It's okay, but nothing I would go out and buy unless I just happened to be really hungry and there was one next to me without 12000 people in line. I really don't get the appeal of their food, on the other hand I really don't get the appeal to most fast food or Applebee's type places either.
There are only a few ways I could see someone not liking Chick-fil-A:

1 - You're vegan or a vegetarian,
2 - You don't like the taste of any fried chicken
3 - You are from a part of the country where Chick-fil-A isn't located, have never eaten it, but you've heard it hyped up as the greatest thing ever created for a long time. When you do get around to trying it, it doesn't live up to the hype. You think it is pretty good, but not quite as good as it was made out to be. And honestly, despite being an apostle for Chick-fil-A, I see how that can happen.

Chick-fil-A is incredible for what it is - fast food fried chicken. So say it is superior to any other fast food or even fast casual food would be an understatement. You cannot really compare it to, say, a more sit-down restaurant's fried chicken, and you certainly can't compare it to some fancy restaurant. It's a different deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
She's an individual that can think for herself - I honestly don't see why people are suggesting she's wrong for doing this or worse, lying about her reasons.

When someone younger than 60+ says he or she quitting "to spend more time with their families," do you automatically accept that as truth or nah?
 
There are only a few ways I could see someone not liking Chick-fil-A:

1 - You're vegan or a vegetarian,
2 - You don't like the taste of any fried chicken
3 - You are from a part of the country where Chick-fil-A isn't located, have never eaten it, but you've heard it hyped up as the greatest thing ever created for a long time. When you do get around to trying it, it doesn't live up to the hype. You think it is pretty good, but not quite as good as it was made out to be. And honestly, despite being an apostle for Chick-fil-A, I see how that can happen.

Chick-fil-A is incredible for what it is - fast food fried chicken. So say it is superior to any other fast food or even fast casual food would be an understatement. You cannot really compare it to, say, a more sit-down restaurant's fried chicken, and you certainly can't compare it to some fancy restaurant. It's a different deal.

This.

I have always wanted to get a platter pf 50 nuggets for a football game with my son. The 2 of us together just weigh a bit over 300lbs..im 175 and he might be 150 at 17 years old. I am certain i could eat my 25 without a sweat and have fries too, though i dont really like the waffle fries. I dont dislike them, and i eat them, but mickey Ds has way way better fries, best on earth IMO. Fries are the only thing on McDs menu that are actually the best of what they are. The seasoning CFA puts in their chicken is just delicious..have no idea what it is though. Has a very unique subtle flavor. Anyone here who eats there could identify if a sammich or nuggets came from there in a blind taste test...
 
They said the values had not sufficiently evolved - sounds like they were saying the values were wrong.

She's an individual that can think for herself - I honestly don't see why people are suggesting she's wrong for doing this or worse, lying about her reasons.
Where did you see the comment about the values not being "evolved?" It wasn't in the original article that was linked to.

I'm not saying she's wrong for doing it, or that she's lying about her true motivations. To me personally, this just wouldn't be worth quitting a cushy job over. It's also interesting and worth pointing out that she only resigned as dean of the business school. She's still working for and getting paid by this school, which in her mind was attempting to make her compromise her values, as a professor.

I think it is silly they aren't being allowed on campus, but I personally wouldn't take that as an affront to my values. Now, when Rahm Emanuel, an elected public official, says something that that, it's a different ballgame.
 
This.

I have always wanted to get a platter pf 50 nuggets for a football game with my son. The 2 of us together just weigh a bit over 300lbs..im 175 and he might be 150 at 17 years old. I am certain i could eat my 25 without a sweat and have fries too, though i dont really like the waffle fries. I dont dislike them, and i eat them, but mickey Ds has way way better fries, best on earth IMO. Fries are the only thing on McDs menu that are actually the best of what they are. The seasoning CFA puts in their chicken is just delicious..have no idea what it is though. Has a very unique subtle flavor. Anyone here who eats there could identify if a sammich or nuggets came from there in a blind taste test...
The flavor of the chicken comes mostly from the peanut oil. It's no secret, and I'm surprised others haven't tried to imitate it more. In fact, there's a ton of obvious stuff Chick-fil-A does that I can't believe other fast food joints don't try and imitate.
 
The flavor of the chicken comes mostly from the peanut oil. It's no secret, and I'm surprised others haven't tried to imitate it more. In fact, there's a ton of obvious stuff Chick-fil-A does that I can't believe other fast food joints don't try and imitate.

They didn’t invent the chicken, just the chicken sammich.
 
Where did you see the comment about the values not being "evolved?" It wasn't in the original article that was linked to.

I'm not saying she's wrong for doing it, or that she's lying about her true motivations. To me personally, this just wouldn't be worth quitting a cushy job over. It's also interesting and worth pointing out that she only resigned as dean of the business school. She's still working for and getting paid by this school, which in her mind was attempting to make her compromise her values, as a professor.

I think it is silly they aren't being allowed on campus, but I personally wouldn't take that as an affront to my values. Now, when Rahm Emanuel, an elected public official, says something that that, it's a different ballgame.

the comment is in another article.

"A November 2018 email announcement to the campus said the restaurant chain’s corporate values "have not sufficiently progressed enough to align with those of Rider.”

the resignation was of a leadership role which she deemed condoning the statement from the university.

watch an interview with her (Campusreform does one). She lays it out pretty clearly why she resigned. The linked article makes it sound like it's the act of barring CFA but that wasn't it; it's a personal protest against a statement from the university. Who am I to question her motives or suggest if it was a "real" issue she should have quit the university altogether.

the story has been spun into something much bigger (and more public) than it really is.

one of her statements explaining why she left university leadership

“I couldn’t put myself in a situation where I would in any way be seen complicit when an affront to my Christian values had been made,” Newman told Campus Reform. "No one group’s opinions, values or beliefs should be elevated over anyone else’s. We should be able to respectfully disagree when it comes to values and ideologies.
 

VN Store



Back
Top