Not an effective way for Freedom-Haters to state their case

Boycotting businesses with which they have an axe to grind, that is.

Didn't work with Chick-Fil-A, didn't work with Whole Foods, won't work with Hobby Lobby.

Megan McArdle explains:

Most boycotts fail because most people just don’t have the intensity to keep them up. In 2003, folks were promising to boycott French products such as Dannon yogurt over the country's stance on Iraq, but Dannon is still on the shelves and seems to be selling well. (Losing market share to the Greek invasion, to be sure, but as far as I know that has no political content other than the love of a creamier, richer taste in your fermented dairy products.) A few years later, liberals were going to boycott Whole Foods because … well, I don’t remember what the CEO had done, but I’m sure it was something. Whole Foods is also suffering -- from increased competition in its core business. The boycott seems to have had little to no effect.

It’s just hard to maintain that sort of intensity when you’re busy and vacation is coming up, and Mom needs help with her computer, and yes, honey, I’ll stop on the way home and pick up more yogurt. For all but the most bitterly partisan of partisans, motivation eventually gives way to more pressing concerns such as convenience.

Culture warriors face two additional problems:

1. They tend to want to boycott places they never shopped at in the first place.
2. The company’s actual core demographic takes umbrage about the boycott and stages a much more effective counterboycott.

But it makes them feel like caring persons, and that is a huge motivator among FHers.