I’ve read this letter numerous times, from any number of bylines. People all over the country and even some students here at Wichita State want Chick-fil-A to be done for.

I thought these arguments were over in 2015, but a reader this week has asked that we make notice of Chick-fil-A — almost everyone’s favorite campus food option — because it serves as a reminder to the reader that they and their LGBTQ peers aren’t welcome.

The reader strung together a collection of logical fallacies that claimed Chick-fil-A didn’t score acceptably on their scale for LGBTQ inclusiveness, missing the mark entirely with a zero out of 100 score while other on-campus tenants scored inside a more acceptable range.

The claim is that Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy’s opposition to a 2015 Supreme Court ruling allowing same-sex marriage is a violation against the first amendment’s religious freedom clause. Cathy’s father died in 2014, but Dan continued to relay his father’s sentiments when he took ownership of the company. But those comments ceased years ago.

It’s almost as if the reader doesn’t understand the First Amendment, which includes the freedom of religion and speech, which Cathy chose to express in his opposition of LGBTQ rights.

If we dug deep enough into every CEO’s past to find something to disagree with, and then put them out of business for their lawful expressions of religious beliefs, everyone would be silenced, which is the true danger to the First Amendment here.

Chick-fil-A hasn’t done anything wrong — except for leaving milkshakes off the menu at their Wichita State location.

Section 3.02 of Wichita State University’s Policies and Procedures — the University’s Notice of Nondiscrimination — protects students should they choose to work on campus. The reader uses this example as evidence that Chick-fil-A can’t abide by WSU’s standard given that it conflicts with Dan Cathy’s donations and public comments.

Everyone has a choice — where they work, eat, and go to school — it’s all up to them.

This reader, like others before them, doesn’t approve of the same organizations and ideas Dan Cathy supports, but if three years later, they can’t put these disagreements down for long enough to enjoy a chicken sandwich, maybe they should give up the fight.

Somehow this reader got stuck in 2014 and can’t get out. This argument is old, lame and a waste of valuable time we all could have spent gnawing on some savory waffle fries.