I thought the Chik-Fil-A situation was resolved. Back in September, it was announced
that they'd ceased donating money to "organizations that promote discrimination, specifically against LGBT civil rights." They've already caved to public opinion. If anything, it might be better if people did
support their business now in order to express approval for that new policy. If they lost business while they supported discrimination and gained business back again after ending that policy, it would give them an incentive to continue on the right path. Well, hopefully. I think that as a rule, positive reinforcement does more good than negative. You can be more successful at changing people's behavior by giving them rewards for changing than by punishing them for not changing.
I can't believe I didn't hear about the policy change before now. Thanks for sharing this.
ETA: After discussing this with some of my family, it was brought to my attention that Chick-Fil-A has said they've "made no such concessions" and are being very ambiguous about whether they are or are not still donating to those groups. They say they continue to support family-centric groups, but don't specify which
Which could mean that either nothing's changed and they're just trying to keep quiet about it now so it casts reasonable doubt, or they may not want to admit they stopped donating to Focus on the Family because they don't want to bring about a boycott from the anti-gay groups as well. (Check out Josh Hutchison's reply at http://www.mikehuckabee.com/mike-huc...e-63cb9145e01a
for an example.)