|
This story is a few days old however I was surprised that there wasn't a thread about it on TL. I think that this story is actually pretty interesting and brings up some incredibly valid discussions about how much power a mayor should have and highlights just how heated the gay marriage debate is in the United States.
For a quick overview, Chic-Fil-A is a fast food chain in the United States that has always been run by very traditional Christians. For example despite their growth they have always stayed closed on Sundays. Their position against gay marriage has been widely known for awhile now as has their support for anti-gay marriage organizations, but recently they supposedly made some comments on gay marriage that many people found to be offensive or bigoted. It got bloggers and others on the internet into a slight uproar and culminated with Jim Henson's Muppets company breaking ties with them and now the Mayor of Boston claims that he will block Chic-Fil-A from opening a restaurant in his city.
This brings up the question of whether or not a mayor and the city council should be allowed to use zoning laws to bar a company from operating inside of their city or not because they disagree with that company's views. It also, obviously, brings up the continued gay marriage debate about whether or not a company should even be allowed to get involved in social issues the way Chic-Fil-A has in the past (i.e., by donating to some anti-gay rights organizations).
Personally, I am glad that the mayor took a stand for gay marriage as that's actually pretty cool to see. I am a bit concerned though because it's not like the people of Boston got a say in this matter and I'm not sure if I'm comfortable knowing a city can just stop a company from doing business with it because of something that's completely separate from business. Although, I suppose, one could argue that by allowing Chic-Fil-A to operate in Boston the city of Boston would by proxy be helping fund the fight against gay marriage in America.
Sources:
The Consumerist (plus the mayor's actual letter): http://consumerist.com/2012/07/heres-the-letter-where-boston-mayor-tells-chick-fil-a-to-stay-the-cluck-out-of-his-town.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/chick-fil-a-gay_n_1689800.html
Fox News: http://nation.foxnews.com/chic-fil/2012/07/21/boston-mayor-vows-keep-chic-fil-out-city
edit:
Wanted to put this in the OP as I think it's important.
On July 26 2012 06:05 KwarK wrote:
If someone openly politicises their company by taking a corporate stance on issues like this then they invite a broader social referendum on their operation. Whether or not it is the prerogative of the mayor to make that decision is another question but I have no problem with a company going "this is what we stand for" and a city going "we don't want what you stand for". If they stood just for good chicken then they wouldn't be having this problem.
Also wanted to point out that it isn't just the owner's. Chick-Fil-A is an anti-gay company. They donated money to and have brazenly supported anti-gay rights groups. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick-fil-A#Support_of_anti-gay_organizations
So please, stop saying that it's "just the owner's of Chick-Fil-A" or that the company isn't anti-gay. Because you're wrong. Just because they allow gays to eat at their restaurant doesn't mean they aren't opposed to gay rights as a company.
edit 2:
Thanks to unteqair for pointing out that Chicago is also joining in on the ban.
http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-chick-fil-a-chicago-20120725,0,4158667.story
edit 3:
Boston mayor has now backed down from his threat of banning Chick-Fil-A and it remains to be seen if Chick-Fil-A will open stores in the city.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1061148850&srvc=rss
|
Baller!
I live in Boston, and I for one would love to see that bastion of Southern bigotry get out of my city!
Heck, use eminent domain, zoning laws, whatever. Just get them gone!
Just look at this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html
I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,' and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about
Disgusting.
|
Self evidently it is not baller for the Government to openly [or discreetly] favour one business over another for whatever reason. This is an abuse of power, and for that matter its basically an attempt by local Government to bully businesses politically. Anyone who supports this is basically a fascist.
|
It's perfectly reasonable to try and keep hicks like this down as much as possible.
|
The mayor want's to keep Chic-Fil-A out of his city because he got his jimmies rustled by a comment on gay marriage? Seems silly. I think a better solution is to grow some thicker skin, and continue to enjoy the best fast food chain.
On July 26 2012 05:57 Zaqwert wrote:
You shouldn't base what should and shouldn't be allowed in society based on your own personal beliefs and agenda.
This thought police crap has to end.
This
|
Rather than banning that company, he should try to establish some anti-discrimination laws.
That way he has a legitimally legal tool to punish organisations like them instead of "I just feel like it".
|
I wonder how everyone would feel if the mayor of Birmingham, AL said he was going to use zoning laws to force out all the Muslim and Jewish owned business.
Would you be cheering that?
Probably not.
You shouldn't base what should and shouldn't be allowed in society based on your own personal beliefs and agenda.
Clearly mayors should not have the power to ban legit businesses from their city just 'cuz they disagree with their beliefs.
50 years ago the talk would have been to drive the gays out and that would have been wrong too.
This thought police crap has to end. Let people live their own lives. If you don't wanna give Chic Fil A your business because you disagree with their policies, then don't. It's not the governments job to sanction what is acceptable beliefs.
|
For people who are in favor of this just because they agree with the position, what happens when another town does the same thing to say Starbucks for giving money to pro-gay marriage organizations?
Do we really want politics deciding business decisions as well.
|
looks like a good reason never to go to boston
|
On July 26 2012 05:58 unichan wrote:
looks like a good reason never to go to boston
looks like a perfectly valid reason to move to Boston!
|
It is a retaliatory statement after chick fil a made bigoted remarks Zaqwert. You're theorycrafting a hell of a lot in that post. Then again I imagine most of the posts in this thread will be nothing but each users own believes expounded and projected onto the situation at hand.
Which, in my opinion, is a non-news situation. Some Mayor says something; come campaign time when he's accused of cutting jobs from harboring a grudge by his opponent he might change his tune. Who knows. It's a political statement; I don't take it seriously.
|
On July 26 2012 05:58 R3DT1D3 wrote:
For people who are in favor of this just because they agree with the position, what happens when another town does the same thing to say Starbucks for giving money to pro-gay marriage organizations?
Do we really want politics deciding business decisions as well.
Good to see someone gets it.
I'm pro-free speech, unless someone says something I don't agree with, shut those people up!
I'm anti-discrimination, unless I don't like the people being discriminated against, screw them!
etc.
Government policy should not be based on your own personal beliefs and preferences.
|
On July 26 2012 05:53 Praetorial wrote:Baller! I live in Boston, and I for one would love to see that bastion of Southern bigotry get out of my city! Heck, use eminent domain, zoning laws, whatever. Just get them gone! Just look at this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.htmlShow nested quote +
I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,' and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about
Disgusting.
Well, while I agree with you that bigotry etc is wrong, this is not the issue here, how would you feel if, for example, the mayor of Houston decides to ban restaurant chain X because of its liberal policies?
Its about a mayor overstepping his bounds, not bigotry.
|
On July 26 2012 05:58 R3DT1D3 wrote:
For people who are in favor of this just because they agree with the position, what happens when another town does the same thing to say Starbucks for giving money to pro-gay marriage organizations?
Do we really want politics deciding business decisions as well.
Well, businesses already decide politics in America though lol. But yeah, I do agree that I don't think we should have government telling us where we can and cannot do business. I might dislike Chic-Fil-A's stance and refuse to eat there but that doesn't mean someone else should be forced to not do business with them.
|
On July 26 2012 05:58 R3DT1D3 wrote:
For people who are in favor of this just because they agree with the position, what happens when another town does the same thing to say Starbucks for giving money to pro-gay marriage organizations?
Do we really want politics deciding business decisions as well.
agreed! Not really something that should be up to the mayor, i think everyone should boycott this piece of retarded business anyway though.
|
Not sure the rules should work in a way to ban people because of their thoughts. But hope it works out and that they can ban them from there in this case.
|
United States44203 Posts
If someone openly politicises their company by taking a corporate stance on issues like this then they invite a broader social referendum on their operation. Whether or not it is the prerogative of the mayor to make that decision is another question but I have no problem with a company going "this is what we stand for" and a city going "we don't want what you stand for". If they stood just for good chicken then they wouldn't be having this problem.
|
The intellectually honest question is:
You either believe a mayor should have the power to ban a business because he disagrees with the owners religion or you don't.
You can't pick and choose which religions are "ok" to legally discriminate against and which ones aren't.
It would also be the same thing if a religious mayor wanted to ban atheist businesses.
It's not the government's job to punish businesses for their beliefs, individuals should have the power to support/not support them.
|
As a southerner (and in particular someone from Atlanta), I have to say that despite Chik Fil A's stupid stance on Gay Marriage, they have an incredible impact on their community. They provide many of their employees scholarships to go to college, and offer much better benefits than any other restaurant I have heard of.
Chik Fil A isn't against Gay Marriage, the Cathy family (the owners) are. And any mayor who wants to ban a business for its owner's beliefs is asking for trouble. You just can't do that.
|
On July 26 2012 05:58 unichan wrote:
looks like a good reason never to go to boston
No, Boston's actually a really nice place. We have good schools too I hear.
On July 26 2012 05:58 R3DT1D3 wrote:
For people who are in favor of this just because they agree with the position, what happens when another town does the same thing to say Starbucks for giving money to pro-gay marriage organizations?
Do we really want politics deciding business decisions as well.
Condemn them?
Politics have influenced business decisions forever.
On July 26 2012 05:57 Zaqwert wrote:
I wonder how everyone would feel if the mayor of Birmingham, AL said he was going to use zoning laws to force out all the Muslim and Jewish owned business.
Would you be cheering that?
Probably not.
You shouldn't base what should and shouldn't be allowed in society based on your own personal beliefs and agenda.
Clearly mayors should not have the power to ban legit businesses from their city just 'cuz they disagree with their beliefs.
50 years ago the talk would have been to drive the gays out and that would have been wrong too.
This thought police crap has to end. Let people live their own lives. If you don't wanna give Chic Fil A your business because you disagree with their policies, then don't. It's not the governments job to sanction what is acceptable beliefs.
Well, gay marriage isn't inherently a religious position.
So, yes, I'd be unhappy with Muslims or Jews being banned.
But I'm perfectly happy with someone advocating for a hateful agenda(admittedly for religious purposes) be banned.
On July 26 2012 05:57 whatevername wrote:
Self evidently it is not baller for the Government to openly [or discreetly] favour one business over another for whatever reason. This is an abuse of power, and for that matter its basically an attempt by local Government to bully businesses politically. Anyone who supports this is basically a fascist.
Maybe.
In Boston, though, Menino and his predecessors have been known for loving Boston and doing anything in their power to make a nicer place, including using their positions to push over people they don't like.
It's made us one of the most educated and tolerant hubs of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
