'...SJW crap': Website 'Eater' says you 'probably shouldn't eat at Chick-fil-A' because of the 'unpalatable baggage'

Greg P. | 4:51 PM on June 11, 2017

The website “Eater” reviewed Chick-fil-A and came to the conclusion that “you probably shouldn’t eat” at the restaurant because of the company “unpalatable baggage”:

Review: You probably shouldn’t eat at Chick-fil-A https://t.co/gP8l1khQnK pic.twitter.com/x2eDAptTlr

— Eater (@Eater) June 9, 2017

Got that? Christian now equals “unpalatable baggage.” From the review where it’s suggested that partons eat at more progressive eateries like Shake Shack:

And there’s the culinary question, which is whether you should brave the (fast-moving) lines at the home of the “original” pressure-fried chicken sandwich, or whether you should patronize more ambitious (and progressive) poultry-purveying peers like Fuku (only in New York) or Shake Shack.

I used to visit the Chick-fil-A during my D.C. college days, circa 2000, as a cheap and reasonably tasty source of protein after a workout. Nearly two decades later, in my capacity as a restaurant critic, I’m here to report that the increasingly ubiquitous chain serves a pretty good fast-food breakfast, a pretty great frozen coffee, and a pretty average chicken sandwich.

I’m also here to report that it’s the only top 10 quick-service restaurant that doesn’t mention sexual orientation in its online equal opportunity statement, and that it holds a zero rating on LGBT benefits and worker protections from a prominent advocacy group. McDonald’s scored 100. (When I asked Chick-fil-A about this, a rep responded with a general statement reaffirming its commitment to equal opportunity and said that it’s up to local franchisees to determine benefits.)