Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,033 posts)
Mon Jan 15, 2018, 09:28 PM Jan 2018

Chick-fil-A boots breast-feeding mom for nursing her baby girl

A mother from Fargo, N. D. says she was kicked out of a Chick-fil-A over the weekend after she started breast-feeding her infant daughter.

"The owner came to our table where I was showing no more than the upper portion of my breast, barely more than what was visible in my shirt and asked me to cover,” Macy Hornung wrote on her Facebook page.

“I tried to explain that I couldn’t, because my baby refuses to be covered and she started harping about the children and men who can see my indecency and I need to cover," she went on.

"I said they could practice the simple art of looking away and tried to cite North Dakota breastfeeding laws. She told me if I chose not to cover, then she would have to ask me to leave, so I told her my review would reflect my experience and I would be relaying the experience in every local mommy group."

-snip-

The state's legislature passed a law in 2009 giving a woman the right to "breast-feed her child in any location, public or private, where the woman and child are otherwise authorized to be."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/chick-fil-a-boots-breast-feeding-mom-for-nursing-her-baby-girl/ar-AAuJyVR?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=edgsp

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Chick-fil-A boots breast-feeding mom for nursing her baby girl (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jan 2018 OP
To be fair, she requested cornflake fried chicken, Dr Hobbitstein Jan 2018 #1
Go, girl! nt LAS14 Jan 2018 #2
I'd suggest a nurse-in... moriah Jan 2018 #3
she paid for something so she's a paying customer crazycatlady Jan 2018 #7
I'd suggest a lawsuit CanonRay Jan 2018 #4
"Sine the owner viola the law" left-of-center2012 Jan 2018 #12
"indecent"??? since when is nursing indecent??? rurallib Jan 2018 #5
Chik-Fil-A? I wish I ate there so I could boycott them. Aristus Jan 2018 #6
I'm with you there MurrayDelph Jan 2018 #13
Oh that restaurant is in for it now... MineralMan Jan 2018 #8
A year from now the owner will be filing for bank--if she lasts that long. nt tblue37 Jan 2018 #14
It'll go to court. If she sues. Igel Jan 2018 #9
Perhaps because that's not part of the law? Ms. Toad Jan 2018 #15
The OP, and the post you responded to, is about North Dakota petronius Jan 2018 #17
Thanks! Ms. Toad Jan 2018 #18
Chick-fil-A - the restaurants owned and operated by religious nut jobs. Stinky The Clown Jan 2018 #10
These asses protect a fetus but want protect a hungry baby. MLAA Jan 2018 #11
Good Christian family values there. lagomorph777 Jan 2018 #16

moriah

(8,311 posts)
3. I'd suggest a nurse-in...
Mon Jan 15, 2018, 09:31 PM
Jan 2018

.... but I'm not sure even paying for a lemonade to be a paying customer is money I'd want to put in their pockets.

crazycatlady

(4,492 posts)
7. she paid for something so she's a paying customer
Mon Jan 15, 2018, 09:53 PM
Jan 2018

To be fair, their lemonade is more expensive than a soda of the same size. I wish I did not know that, but I can't resist their fries every now and then.

Aristus

(66,386 posts)
6. Chik-Fil-A? I wish I ate there so I could boycott them.
Mon Jan 15, 2018, 09:53 PM
Jan 2018

Haven't eaten at one of their holier-than-thou-shit-slingers since I left Texas in 1982.

MurrayDelph

(5,299 posts)
13. I'm with you there
Mon Jan 15, 2018, 11:48 PM
Jan 2018

There's now way for me to further boycott the company that I have been boycotting for years.

Igel

(35,320 posts)
9. It'll go to court. If she sues.
Mon Jan 15, 2018, 10:08 PM
Jan 2018

Because the quote of the 2009 law is incomplete without the editor's bothering to indicate incompletely by use of ellipses:

"If the woman acts in a discreet and modest manner, a woman may breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where the woman and child are otherwise authorized to be."

Seems odd that the part left out is precisely the objection.

I have no good definition for what ND law says is "discreet and modest manner". Perhaps it's "I recognize it when it happens", perhaps it's "community standards", perhaps it's entirely undefined or perhaps it's meticulously defined.

Or perhaps courts have already weighed in on the point. But it's a narrow legal one, for all the objections.

Ms. Toad

(34,074 posts)
15. Perhaps because that's not part of the law?
Tue Jan 16, 2018, 12:07 AM
Jan 2018

I'm not sure what you're quoting, but here is the Wisconsin law:

253.165? Right to breast-feed. A mother may breast-feed her child in any public or private location where the mother and child are otherwise authorized to be. In such a location, no person may prohibit a mother from breast-feeding her child, direct a mother to move to a different location to breast-feed her child, direct a mother to cover her child or breast while breast-feeding, or otherwise restrict a mother from breast-feeding her child as provided in this section.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Chick-fil-A boots breast-...