The Chick-Fil-A Controversy

[Foxfyre]

What controversy?

Referring you to the OP which a few others here really need to read too.

 

[Wry Catcher]

NYC mayor: Chick-fil-A flap not govt's business | Fox News

Mayors of three cities--Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco--are on record that Chick-Fil-A franchises are not welcome in their cities because of Chick-Fil-A's support of traditional marriage and opposition to same sex marriage. Mayor Bloomberg of NYC is a strong advocate of same sex marriage but opposes restrictions on free enterprise based on political views.

The ACLU has gotten involved and though they too are strong advocates of same sex marriage, they oppose denying franchise privileges to Chick-Fil-A based on this issue. As they point out, if you can deny a business the right to do business based on their anti-gay marriage position, then there is nothing to deny a business the right to do business if it is pro same sex marriage.

Discuss and please try to keep it civil and on topic.

This is NOT about the pros and cons of same sex marriage, but rather the concept of denying a business ability to do business based purely on its social or political views.

I agree with Bloomberg. I wonder how many of those who showed support of C-f-L opposed the building of a Moslem Center near ground zero?

 

[Valerie]

The words "I support traditional marraige, gulty as charged" is now hate speech. Think about that for a minute.

No, that's not it though. Yeah, he said he supports "traditional marriage" which a lot of people go out of their way to say these days, WHY? Because some self-righteous nitwits fear-mongered them into believing that somehow if their gay neighbors get married, that their traditional marriage is somehow in peril...?

Look around, there are all sorts of things in our society which denigrate marriage, so don't go blaming your gay neighbors, for goodness sake!


Good people are getting suckered into sending Millions of dollars to "support traditional marriage". What a joke. These organizations have an expressed political agenda which seeks State discrimination against our fellow Citizens who seek non-traditional marriage.

People like Mr Cathy, God bless him, act AS IF traditional marriage is threatened by the mere existence of non-traditional marriage and good people are duped into rallying around fallacies created by fear-mongers and haters.

Marriage is just a word and gay couples exist with or without it...

Holy Matrimony, known as a traditional Religious Sacrament called Marriage, eventually had certain Statutes built around it which conveyed certain legal rights and privileges to married couples, whether religious or not. THAT tradition is called Civil Marriage and licenses are granted by the power vested in the States which has NOTHING to do with GOD or Religion. The State and the Religion are SEPARATE.



After being bullied into the closet for ages, non-traditional couples eventually stood up and said, hey we want Civil Marriage Statutes to apply to our committed partnerships too! ( God forbid! )


Yes absolutely, in America people are free to be who they are, no matter how many Religious people harm them by insisting their relationships are not worthy, or punish them by speaking of impending wrath of God upon our entire Nation because of them.

Religious belief has zero grounds in denying Citizens their civil rights, and religious zealots have a discriminatory agenda which is offensive to our founding principles, so it's not surprising that when someone publicly supports such an agenda people get upset.

Recognizing people for what they are and having an opinion about them is not seeking the State to discriminate against them. Now, IF certain cities actually sought to deny business permits to Citizens merely for their opinions, then THAT would be discrimination against THEM, but these mayors have merely expressed their opinion too, and then also publicly acknowledged that people with unsavory opinions still have a right to do business, as long as they are not actively discriminating against anyone in the course of doing business.

By all accounts this man is a good family man who employs fair business practices, but he is just another guy, with a misguided opinion...And Millions of dollars...Which have in fact gone toward support of a discriminatory agenda! No matter how some people may try to dress that up by calling it "support of traditional marriage", it is in fact actively seeking State discrimination against your fellow Citizens, which is ya, kinda hateful!

 

[Ravi]

And once more I will remind people that I respectfully requested civility in this thread and requested that it NOT dissolve into yet one more thread defending or opposing gay marriage. This thread is NOT about gay marriage.

This thread IS about whether a business owner's personal opinions about gay marriage or ANY other politically incorrect issue justify anybody, most especially a branch of government, trying to harm or deny him his livelihood purely because he holds beliefs/opinions that offend us.

Look again at the question in the poll. It has zero to do with whether one does or does not support gay marriage.

No one is trying to harm him or deny him his livelihood.

 

[Pho_King]

Take off joker. The only lie here is your posts...

Ok. Well it's good to know that you believe consenting adult relatives should be able to marry, as well as any group of three or more. I assume you also agree that a person can have two seperate spouses. What's that you say? You would still discriminate against those deviant relationships? I thought so. Thanks for reinforcing that you actually do not believ in marriage or any consenting adults. It's ok to think homos are special. But you should just come out and say so, instead of acting like you truly believe in the shit that comes frm your cake hole.

Gee, I bet you think you're clever pretending to know what I think.


First of all genius, a couple is TWO. I personally don't give a shit if you want to partner with several people, but certainly even you can grasp that three is not equal to two. Secondly, although the State may have an interest in you not producing diseased offspring, I personally don't give a shit if you want to marry your sister.

The man reportedly sent Millions of dollars of support to organizations which seek to discriminate against a certain set of Americans. FACT not opinion.

The man is certainly entitled to his opinion, but people need to realize that this never was a matter of free speech. HE chose to speak out and highlight his opinion and now people are choosing to speak out and highlight their own opinions, which are all over the road, more-often-than-not missing the mark, and ultimately perceived as hurtful if not hateful, as well as purposely politically divisive.

Those in a position of power in certain cities have already acknowledged they have no right to deny business permits over opinions, so in fact that never really was an issue either, except in the minds of the confused rabble...

People who show up in support of this man and his business specifically to support his "free speech" or his "right" as an opinionated Christian to run a business, are being fooled AS IF those things are really in question in America today.

It's a shame our leaders are so lame they can't convey a more honest message and explain to the rabble that GOD has nothing to do with Civil Marriage and that OPINIONS never really mattered in questions of Civil Rights.

Gay people exist in America, and the committed life partnerships of ALL consenting adult Citizens should rightfully be recognized equally under State law, which is Constitutionally SEPARATE from God's law.

If you want to discriminate against plural marriages, you should have said so. But you said that " the committed life partnerships of all consenting adults should be recognized under state law". And that would include plural marriages, bigamy, and intrafamilial relationships that meet the criteria you set forth. You seem to have trouble with your own words.

 

[Pho_King]

The words "I support traditional marraige, gulty as charged" is now hate speech. Think about that for a minute.

No, that's not it though. Yeah, he said he supports "traditional marriage" which a lot of people go out of their way to say these days, WHY? Because some self-righteous nitwits fear-mongered them into believing that somehow if their gay neighbors get married, that their traditional marriage is somehow in peril...?

Look around, there are all sorts of things in our society which denigrate marriage, so don't go blaming your gay neighbors, for goodness sake!


Good people are getting suckered into sending Millions of dollars to "support traditional marriage". What a joke. These organizations have an expressed political agenda which seeks State discrimination against our fellow Citizens who seek non-traditional marriage.

People like Mr Cathy, God bless him, act AS IF traditional marriage is threatened by the mere existence of non-traditional marriage and good people are duped into rallying around fallacies created by fear-mongers and haters.

Marriage is just a word and gay couples exist with or without it...

Holy Matrimony, known as a traditional Religious Sacrament called Marriage, eventually had certain Statutes built around it which conveyed certain legal rights and privileges to married couples, whether religious or not. THAT tradition is called Civil Marriage and licenses are granted by the power vested in the States which has NOTHING to do with GOD or Religion. The State and the Religion are SEPARATE.



After being bullied into the closet for ages, non-traditional couples eventually stood up and said, hey we want Civil Marriage Statutes to apply to our committed partnerships too! ( God forbid! )


Yes absolutely, in America people are free to be who they are, no matter how many Religious people harm them by insisting their relationships are not worthy, or punish them by speaking of impending wrath of God upon our entire Nation because of them.

Religious belief has zero grounds in denying Citizens their civil rights, and religious zealots have a discriminatory agenda which is offensive to our founding principles, so it's not surprising that when someone publicly supports such an agenda people get upset.

Recognizing people for what they are and having an opinion about them is not seeking the State to discriminate against them. Now, IF certain cities actually sought to deny business permits to Citizens merely for their opinions, then THAT would be discrimination against THEM, but these mayors have merely expressed their opinion too, and then also publicly acknowledged that people with unsavory opinions still have a right to do business, as long as they are not actively discriminating against anyone in the course of doing business.

By all accounts this man is a good family man who employs fair business practices, but he is just another guy, with a misguided opinion...And Millions of dollars...Which have in fact gone toward support of a discriminatory agenda! No matter how some people may try to dress that up by calling it "support of traditional marriage", it is in fact actively seeking State discrimination against your fellow Citizens, which is ya, kinda hateful!

Great. Now otherwise good people that support traditional marriage at " suckers". Spoken like a true intolerant bigot.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have not made the case of whether the man's opinion and personal activities are hateful or not, because that is a discussion for another thread.

Regardless of anybody's opinion re gay marriage, the subject of this thread is whether a man's personal opinions and distasteful but legal activities, however objectionable we personally see them, is justification to deny him a business license or to attempt to harm his business and livelihood?

 

[Ravi]

I have not made the case of whether the man's opinion and personal activities are hateful or not, because that is a discussion for another thread.

Regardless of anybody's opinion re gay marriage, the subject of this thread is whether a man's personal opinions and distasteful but legal activities, however objectionable we personally see them, is justification to deny him a business license or to attempt to harm his business and livelihood?

No one is attempting to harm his business and livelihood.

As to your other question, it depends on the city charter. A city is not obligated to grant an operating license to anyone.

And it sure didn't disturb the rightwingloons to disallow a mosque in New York City.

 

[Ravi]

The words "I support traditional marraige, gulty as charged" is now hate speech. Think about that for a minute.

No, that's not it though. Yeah, he said he supports "traditional marriage" which a lot of people go out of their way to say these days, WHY? Because some self-righteous nitwits fear-mongered them into believing that somehow if their gay neighbors get married, that their traditional marriage is somehow in peril...?

Look around, there are all sorts of things in our society which denigrate marriage, so don't go blaming your gay neighbors, for goodness sake!


Good people are getting suckered into sending Millions of dollars to "support traditional marriage". What a joke. These organizations have an expressed political agenda which seeks State discrimination against our fellow Citizens who seek non-traditional marriage.

People like Mr Cathy, God bless him, act AS IF traditional marriage is threatened by the mere existence of non-traditional marriage and good people are duped into rallying around fallacies created by fear-mongers and haters.

Marriage is just a word and gay couples exist with or without it...

Holy Matrimony, known as a traditional Religious Sacrament called Marriage, eventually had certain Statutes built around it which conveyed certain legal rights and privileges to married couples, whether religious or not. THAT tradition is called Civil Marriage and licenses are granted by the power vested in the States which has NOTHING to do with GOD or Religion. The State and the Religion are SEPARATE.



After being bullied into the closet for ages, non-traditional couples eventually stood up and said, hey we want Civil Marriage Statutes to apply to our committed partnerships too! ( God forbid! )


Yes absolutely, in America people are free to be who they are, no matter how many Religious people harm them by insisting their relationships are not worthy, or punish them by speaking of impending wrath of God upon our entire Nation because of them.

Religious belief has zero grounds in denying Citizens their civil rights, and religious zealots have a discriminatory agenda which is offensive to our founding principles, so it's not surprising that when someone publicly supports such an agenda people get upset.

Recognizing people for what they are and having an opinion about them is not seeking the State to discriminate against them. Now, IF certain cities actually sought to deny business permits to Citizens merely for their opinions, then THAT would be discrimination against THEM, but these mayors have merely expressed their opinion too, and then also publicly acknowledged that people with unsavory opinions still have a right to do business, as long as they are not actively discriminating against anyone in the course of doing business.

By all accounts this man is a good family man who employs fair business practices, but he is just another guy, with a misguided opinion...And Millions of dollars...Which have in fact gone toward support of a discriminatory agenda! No matter how some people may try to dress that up by calling it "support of traditional marriage", it is in fact actively seeking State discrimination against your fellow Citizens, which is ya, kinda hateful!

Great. Now otherwise good people that support traditional marriage at " suckers". Spoken like a true intolerant bigot.

You should try reading for comprehension and then you might not look like such a fool. Well....maybe not.

 

[Full-Auto]

There's something really sickening in the realization that thousands of people proudly support discrimination.

You dont mind with the tax code..............

Double standards?

 

[sfcalifornia]

I have not made the case of whether the man's opinion and personal activities are hateful or not, because that is a discussion for another thread.

Regardless of anybody's opinion re gay marriage, the subject of this thread is whether a man's personal opinions and distasteful but legal activities, however objectionable we personally see them, is justification to deny him a business license or to attempt to harm his business and livelihood?

I don't think the government has a right to deny a business license to anyone based on their opinions regarding anything as long as the business follows all legalities. In fact, I would welcome Chick-fil-a to San Francisco. Yes, I would. Just let them try to open up a store here. I dare them.

 

[Pho_King]

No, that's not it though. Yeah, he said he supports "traditional marriage" which a lot of people go out of their way to say these days, WHY? Because some self-righteous nitwits fear-mongered them into believing that somehow if their gay neighbors get married, that their traditional marriage is somehow in peril...?

Look around, there are all sorts of things in our society which denigrate marriage, so don't go blaming your gay neighbors, for goodness sake!


Good people are getting suckered into sending Millions of dollars to "support traditional marriage". What a joke. These organizations have an expressed political agenda which seeks State discrimination against our fellow Citizens who seek non-traditional marriage.

People like Mr Cathy, God bless him, act AS IF traditional marriage is threatened by the mere existence of non-traditional marriage and good people are duped into rallying around fallacies created by fear-mongers and haters.

Marriage is just a word and gay couples exist with or without it...

Holy Matrimony, known as a traditional Religious Sacrament called Marriage, eventually had certain Statutes built around it which conveyed certain legal rights and privileges to married couples, whether religious or not. THAT tradition is called Civil Marriage and licenses are granted by the power vested in the States which has NOTHING to do with GOD or Religion. The State and the Religion are SEPARATE.



After being bullied into the closet for ages, non-traditional couples eventually stood up and said, hey we want Civil Marriage Statutes to apply to our committed partnerships too! ( God forbid! )


Yes absolutely, in America people are free to be who they are, no matter how many Religious people harm them by insisting their relationships are not worthy, or punish them by speaking of impending wrath of God upon our entire Nation because of them.

Religious belief has zero grounds in denying Citizens their civil rights, and religious zealots have a discriminatory agenda which is offensive to our founding principles, so it's not surprising that when someone publicly supports such an agenda people get upset.

Recognizing people for what they are and having an opinion about them is not seeking the State to discriminate against them. Now, IF certain cities actually sought to deny business permits to Citizens merely for their opinions, then THAT would be discrimination against THEM, but these mayors have merely expressed their opinion too, and then also publicly acknowledged that people with unsavory opinions still have a right to do business, as long as they are not actively discriminating against anyone in the course of doing business.

By all accounts this man is a good family man who employs fair business practices, but he is just another guy, with a misguided opinion...And Millions of dollars...Which have in fact gone toward support of a discriminatory agenda! No matter how some people may try to dress that up by calling it "support of traditional marriage", it is in fact actively seeking State discrimination against your fellow Citizens, which is ya, kinda hateful!

Great. Now otherwise good people that support traditional marriage at " suckers". Spoken like a true intolerant bigot.

You should try reading for comprehension and then you might not look like such a fool. Well....maybe not.

I guess you missed that line about " good people getting suckered". Probably one of the giant turds floating around in your head was disrupting your vision.

 

[Ravi]

Great. Now otherwise good people that support traditional marriage at " suckers". Spoken like a true intolerant bigot.

You should try reading for comprehension and then you might not look like such a fool. Well....maybe not.

I guess you missed that line about " good people getting suckered". Probably one of the giant turds floating around in your head was disrupting your vision.

Ah, I see you simply cannot read for comprehension.

So sad.

 

[BDBoop]

Yes until then it seems at best a choice. At worst a DSM classified paraphilia as it was until 1973 and a political movement, akin to what he have today, had it removed.

As I said go for it, do what you do. But I personally dont see protected status or rights anymore than I do the person who enjoys infantilism or any other classified paraphilia.

Rights are not yours to grant.

Correct as we are all "Endowed by our creator"

They aren't the govt's right to grant or deny either.

They are in America, when it comes to rights denied. That wrong needs to be righted.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

NYC mayor: Chick-fil-A flap not govt's business | Fox News

Mayors of three cities--Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco--are on record that Chick-Fil-A franchises are not welcome in their cities because of Chick-Fil-A's support of traditional marriage and opposition to same sex marriage. Mayor Bloomberg of NYC is a strong advocate of same sex marriage but opposes restrictions on free enterprise based on political views.

The ACLU has gotten involved and though they too are strong advocates of same sex marriage, they oppose denying franchise privileges to Chick-Fil-A based on this issue. As they point out, if you can deny a business the right to do business based on their anti-gay marriage position, then there is nothing to deny a business the right to do business if it is pro same sex marriage.

Discuss and please try to keep it civil and on topic.

This is NOT about the pros and cons of same sex marriage, but rather the concept of denying a business ability to do business based purely on its social or political views.

I agree with Bloomberg. I wonder how many of those who showed support of C-f-L opposed the building of a Moslem Center near ground zero?

Now there is some hypocricy along the lines of this http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...death-to-gays.html?highlight=menino+hypocricy

I did take issue with the naming of that mosque, the cordoba center, because of the historical implications of the naming but I don't deny that any religion should be free to open a place of worship on any property they may own.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Rights are not yours to grant.

Correct as we are all "Endowed by our creator"

They aren't the govt's right to grant or deny either.

They are in America, when it comes to rights denied. That wrong needs to be righted.

BD I think you actually understood the intent of my statement I am happy about this

We shouldn't have the govt invovled in marriage at all in my opinion. If 2 gay people want to get married good for them as it does not harm me and mine . If 2 straight people want to get married good for them as it does not harm me and mine either.

I just wish govt would actually get out of marriage all together, no more special treatment under the tax code for married people that single people do not get. That is discrimination.....just like gay couples whos states don't let them get married.

 

[BDBoop]

But until it is, the rights need to across the board.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes, there is a LOT of hypocrisy going around. And Ravi and others may indeed succeed in derailing this thread from its original O.P. But thanks to those who have understood the point in the O.P. and who are doing their damndest to discuss it.

Yet that mosque is a really compelling illustration to go along with Chick-fil-a. I have never ever at any time objected to the mosque. I have thought that it would be a thoughtful gesture in the name of compassion to locate it somewhere other than essentially right at Ground Zero, but I think it highly inappropriate for the government to dictate where the mosque or any other religious building can go if zoning is not an issue.

Perhaps it would be also be seen as equally insensitive to build a Chick-fil-a next to a gay church or bar or whatever given the gay community's problems with Chick-fil-a?

But evenso, the issue remains. Is everybody to be allowed their opinions and points of view if they are not violating anybody's rights? Or are only those who are politically correct to be allowed their opinions and points of view without retaliation?

 

[saveliberty]

Does the business refuse service to gays? Do gays expect a service from the business other than food or to use the bathroom? No harm has been done. Have a nice lunch everyone.

 

[BDBoop]

Does the business refuse service to gays? Do gays expect a service from the business other than food or to use the bathroom? No harm has been done. Have a nice lunch everyone.

No, they just say that in their esteemed Christian opinion, marriage is between a man and a woman.