The company's big in Georgia, at least for some neighborhoods. I have no idea beyond that. Some natural avoidance here about fast-food chicken. Or maybe it's just unsliced chicken generally? It's that one kind of bone I never enjoyed picking over.
The store is a family type restaurant and is it worth showing a group of children that grown ups can act like two-year-olds? Hand out flyers or picket near the store but demonstrations of public affection as a protest turn me off.
To me, this would be like criticizing union members for wearing their hard hats to a picket line over job conditions. Doesn't it make sense to have a display of orientation, when the protest is about an attack on a specific orientation? Also, why exactly must "family" (who defines that?) and witnessing a kiss (or twenty kisses/10 min. on a random day) be considered contradictory themes?
That such a vague argument often flies, makes me think... Social conservatives are betting that people will either fall into internalized homophobia or just internalized sex-negative ideology. I am not saying you
personally are(or aren't) any of those things on this issue-- that's really not my concern here. I am saying that a vague claim, "'the flag of family' contradicts public kissing" works
very well from a social conservative point of view at least partly because it activates odd social taboos that are not often defined or debated. They may not even be the same exact taboos from one supporter to another. But there's this mystique to taboo where people refuse to analyze the reasoning behind their chosen slogan. It's about family, damn you, so shut up and do or don't do whatever I say.
As for me, I may not be super persuaded
by a mass, endless display of kissing, but I wouldn't call it childish. A major point of all this to me is that one side wants an orientation to have status, and the other doesn't. Perhaps conservatives are primarily concerned with LGB as "demanding rights" generally (and I guess some liberals are too -- think, marriage at the expense of so many other platforms). In contrast, I think the kissing is simply gays saying to each other and to the community, "Um hello, we're here and we're real no matter what Chick wants for us. [Ergo: You can't
make us go away. You might as well be realistic and start dealing on status.]" As an in-group thing too though: I see it more as an act of solidarity and resistance than a would-be silver bullet aimed at Chick per se. It's kind of odd to argue that a group should restrain itself from displaying some of its most characteristic behaviors, when that group feels that it's basically being wished away by someone else.
(adds) Well.... Perhaps it's a disagreement about whether one can obtain status while denying their own membership a potentially very important mode of affirmation and support. Did the Christian right gain political prominence by never showing a cross until the conservative right courted them as a voting bloc? Or was it more the other way around?