Interesting points of view in there.The part that caught my eye was
The theme in the article is that the manager forced some sort of action onto the hungry man and made him accept it before giving him food.Thing is though, there would have been no argument at all (I think) if the manager said "ok, I'll give you a meal if you wash all the windows in the store," because the hungry man would have been giving the manager something in return for something he wanted. (barter, one of the earliest forms of commerce.)So really, the hungry man was doing just that. Exchanging his time for goods and services. The man could have done one of two things. 1) listened intently and maybe learned something he didn't know before, or 2) listened respectfully, knowing that he would be nourished afterwards, even though he wasn't particularly interested in the verbal message.

Interesting.I think the author is correct. This doesn't seem to be a Christian lesson, but a lesson in barter (as you pointed out, Jeep). This is not giving. IF Chik-fil-A asked if the manager could pray with the poor man, then I think the story would be fine. It's the conditional requirement that I have a problem with.Unless the intent is barter, and not giving....

Lets look at this in aspect of Jesus, did he not feed and offer sermon on the mountain. Its really funny today what people bring as wrong or right. People pray to win games lottery sports do you really think that God is sitting there waiting for the Broncos to loose. Yet people pray to their God for them to win. The man did what he could and offered a Blessing over it so to me why would one even question what was right or wrong. Did he ask the Homeless man what he though or did as usual just come to ones conclusion.

The article does say he asked the homeless man if he would pray with him first, indicating that the homeless man needed to do that before receiving food. If he brought the food first and let the man eat and THEN asked if he would pray with him, I think that is a different type of interaction. Just the barter of prayer for food that caught my eye with this article.

So you say pray after you eat. So then what's the problem the man was hungry and got a meal. True good deeds are cost to some one always. Actions

But I don't feel like the Bible backs up that statement that true good deeds are a cost to the receiver? The giver should be doing it out of the goodness of their own hearts, not for public accolades. "Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' in front of others, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven." NIV Matthew 6:1 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full." NIV Matthew 6:5

So what's Chik-fil-A's corporate policy? Is a manager legally allowed to do that?

Probably, they deny birth control coverage and sponsor a camp to forcibly convert gay kids to heterosexuality so what's a free meal. Or maybe the manager paid out of his own pocket.

I can't imagine they'd NOT be allowed to do it. There might be a corporate policy of making the meal contingent upon prayer. I'm wondering if the prayer was really an offer or a condition. Like I said, I have no problem with the "may I pray with you?" or "I'd like to pray with you. Is that okay?"Very different, IMO.

Oh brother...The supposedly "spiritually molested" individual told the news station that:
"the gesture restored his faith in humanity..." that doesn't sound like someone abused.A quote by the homeless guy:
“It’s amazing how many times this story happens a day and how many people ignore it. It’s really restored my faith and belief that people actually care out there anymore,” Burkeen explained. He wasn't forced to pray. It sounds like he didn't mind being prayed for, and appreciated it.

I think "spiritually molested" is waaaaay too strong here. But, I do agree that it is not really a Christian lesson here. And regardless how the homeless man felt about it, having his faith in humanity stored, if the employee DID make it a condition for eating a meal, I think that's wrong to do. A simple "may I pray with you" would be more Christian-like.

wth!?
One can not convert gay kids to heterosexuality any more than you can make a white child black... I can not comprehend that a camp such as this exists.

Anyone comes up to me praying while i am chowing down and i am popping a couple Alka Seltzers in my mouth and Yelling how much i love the devil.

I have known a few students that have had part time jobs working at some of their restaurants. I never did quite find out if management tries to get a point of view across to employees or not or if it came from co workers However, none of the students stayed there for too long before they worked elsewhere, All of the students were quite tolerant and compassionate. But when they were told by other employees that if someone prayed hard enough and truly repented anyone could be changed from gay to straight. it was time to fined new employment which they did, They were also told by co workers there that when the economy improved the gays could afford to date women and get married and there would be no more gays. Around here there are a couple of malls where they operated and when the time came their leases were not renewed by the mall. This is good.

In the article lanestar7 posted there's a link to the original Facebook post written by the man who supposedly witnessed the interaction between the manager and the homeless man. Below is a portion of that FB post:"All I could pick up on of the conversation was the manager saying that he'd love to give him a full, warm meal--not just scraps or extras--, and the only thing he required was that the man let him pray with him." Notice the word "required"?I look at it this way, the man was hungry, he got a meal with the required sprinkling of magic on top and the man doing the praying (preying?) walked away feeling like a very pious man. The end.