|
On July 26 2012 06:20 Gunther wrote:
Anyone else find this funny considering how rude people and unfriendly people from Boston tend to be? Not that being tolerant and plolite/friendly have anything to do with each other. You'd just think maybe they'd be related.
Every major city is like that. I don't think people in Boston are any more rude than people in Atlanta or Houston.
|
On July 26 2012 06:21 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:19 Necro)Phagist( wrote:
Hmm, I'm all for gay marriage and think the fast food restaurant owners are dicks. But I am 100% against the abuse of power here, yes those people suck but let the population tell them that but boycotting their restaurant. You should not be able to ban a company just because they are against your own political agenda. Thats wrong.
Less freedom(Even if it mean enduring something you don't agree with) Is a bad thing. These people how ever bigoted or stupid they are, have the right to belief what they want and own a restaurant as long as they are not actually causing physical harm, which they are not.
Again I'm completely against the organization and their stand points, but they have rights too. If people want to make a bigger statement boycott them. Abusing political power is a slippery slope, one that I don't think we should even for good reasons creep to the edge of. Menino doesn't abuse power. He just hits very hard with it whatever he(and by extension Boston) don't like. And here in Boston, we prefer McDonalds so nobody cares about Chic-fil-a anyway.
Banning a company from opening up a shop because of their beliefs is an abuse of power.
If Boston prefers McDonalds anyway then let them open up shop and lose money for it? Them getting to open a store that doesn't sell any food would be more detrimental to them anyway.
|
I don't think you can make an argument about this hurting the city's economy or making the city lose money. There are hundreds of fast food restaurants lol. If it isn't Chick-Fil-A opening up it'll just be someone else.
|
On July 26 2012 06:20 Gunther wrote:
Anyone else find this funny considering how rude people and unfriendly people from Boston tend to be? Not that being tolerant and plolite/friendly have anything to do with each other. You'd just think maybe they'd be related.
We tend to be more progressive, overt, blunt with what we believe in.
And from there we base policy-stating exactly what it does.
Where do you live-if it's a major city, I'd be happy to provide a sample of stereotyping for you.
On July 26 2012 06:22 Necro)Phagist( wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:21 Praetorial wrote:On July 26 2012 06:19 Necro)Phagist( wrote:
Hmm, I'm all for gay marriage and think the fast food restaurant owners are dicks. But I am 100% against the abuse of power here, yes those people suck but let the population tell them that but boycotting their restaurant. You should not be able to ban a company just because they are against your own political agenda. Thats wrong.
Less freedom(Even if it mean enduring something you don't agree with) Is a bad thing. These people how ever bigoted or stupid they are, have the right to belief what they want and own a restaurant as long as they are not actually causing physical harm, which they are not.
Again I'm completely against the organization and their stand points, but they have rights too. If people want to make a bigger statement boycott them. Abusing political power is a slippery slope, one that I don't think we should even for good reasons creep to the edge of. Menino doesn't abuse power. He just hits very hard with it whatever he(and by extension Boston) don't like. And here in Boston, we prefer McDonalds so nobody cares about Chic-fil-a anyway. Banning a company from opening up a shop because of their beliefs is an abuse of power. If Boston prefers McDonalds anyway then let them open up shop and lose money for it? Them getting to open a store that doesn't sell any food would be more detrimental to them anyway.
No it isn't.
And again, getting rid of this restaurant hurts nobody.
|
On July 26 2012 06:21 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:19 Necro)Phagist( wrote:
Hmm, I'm all for gay marriage and think the fast food restaurant owners are dicks. But I am 100% against the abuse of power here, yes those people suck but let the population tell them that but boycotting their restaurant. You should not be able to ban a company just because they are against your own political agenda. Thats wrong.
Less freedom(Even if it mean enduring something you don't agree with) Is a bad thing. These people how ever bigoted or stupid they are, have the right to belief what they want and own a restaurant as long as they are not actually causing physical harm, which they are not.
Again I'm completely against the organization and their stand points, but they have rights too. If people want to make a bigger statement boycott them. Abusing political power is a slippery slope, one that I don't think we should even for good reasons creep to the edge of. Menino doesn't abuse power. He just hits very hard with it whatever he(and by extension Boston) don't like. And here in Boston, we prefer McDonalds so nobody cares about Chic-fil-a anyway. Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:20 YODA_ wrote:On July 26 2012 06:14 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote: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. They're not been closed because they're a Christian organisation. They're been closed because they are openly been bigoted to another subsection of society. If my local curry house put posters up encouraging the destruction is Israel and suggesting Jews shouldn't be able to marry then I don't think they should be able to stay open either. See, here is where you are 100% wrong. Chick Fil-A does NOT discriminate against gays. Their owner does, but he doesn't force his personal beliefs into his business policy. If his company policy was, "no gays allowed to work here", or "we don't serve gays", then I agree 100%, kick the idiots out. This is not the case, and has been stated as such by the owner himself. The Boston Mayor is a bigoted idiot himself, setting a very dangerous precedent. Our mayors do that. And we approve(most of us, at any rate).
Boston, #25 city in America in obesity, go MccyDs and be proud.
|
On July 26 2012 06:20 YODA_ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:14 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote: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. They're not been closed because they're a Christian organisation. They're been closed because they are openly been bigoted to another subsection of society. If my local curry house put posters up encouraging the destruction is Israel and suggesting Jews shouldn't be able to marry then I don't think they should be able to stay open either. See, here is where you are wrong. Chick Fil-A does NOT discriminate against gays. Their owner does, but he doesn't force his personal beliefs into his business policy. If his company policy was, "no gays allowed to work here", or "we don't serve gays", then I agree 100%, kick the idiots out. This is not the case, and has been stated as such by the owner himself. The Boston Mayor is a bigoted idiot himself, setting a very dangerous precedent.
I really don't think you can draw the line so easily.
Let's pretend that the current ruler of Syria decides to open a restaurant in your town, would you approve of that, do you think your Mayor should let him?
No business is 100% separate from the actions of those who own it.
|
I bet most of the people saying they think that the company should not be allowed in Boston would also say they are for free speech...
No one ever bans health food companies who advertise against and campaign against obesity; aren't they being discriminatory against a subset of the population? But if a company advertises against and campaigns against homosexuality then the company is immediately demonized. This is pretty clearly a freedom of speech issue and the mayor is against freedom of speech.
|
On July 26 2012 06:21 Velocirapture wrote:
Lots of towns all over the place ban businesses for all sorts of reasons. My aunt lives in an artificially quaint upper class town that banned fast food restaurants because it would ruin the atmosphere. I live in a hippie college town that wont allow Target to be built here for moral reasons. I don't know what powers the locals in Boston have by law but it is hardly unprecedented for a community to oust a business for non business reasons.
So because it happens elsewhere makes it right? That's a terrible argument.
|
On July 26 2012 06:24 YODA_ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:21 Praetorial wrote:On July 26 2012 06:19 Necro)Phagist( wrote:
Hmm, I'm all for gay marriage and think the fast food restaurant owners are dicks. But I am 100% against the abuse of power here, yes those people suck but let the population tell them that but boycotting their restaurant. You should not be able to ban a company just because they are against your own political agenda. Thats wrong.
Less freedom(Even if it mean enduring something you don't agree with) Is a bad thing. These people how ever bigoted or stupid they are, have the right to belief what they want and own a restaurant as long as they are not actually causing physical harm, which they are not.
Again I'm completely against the organization and their stand points, but they have rights too. If people want to make a bigger statement boycott them. Abusing political power is a slippery slope, one that I don't think we should even for good reasons creep to the edge of. Menino doesn't abuse power. He just hits very hard with it whatever he(and by extension Boston) don't like. And here in Boston, we prefer McDonalds so nobody cares about Chic-fil-a anyway. On July 26 2012 06:20 YODA_ wrote:On July 26 2012 06:14 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote: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. They're not been closed because they're a Christian organisation. They're been closed because they are openly been bigoted to another subsection of society. If my local curry house put posters up encouraging the destruction is Israel and suggesting Jews shouldn't be able to marry then I don't think they should be able to stay open either. See, here is where you are 100% wrong. Chick Fil-A does NOT discriminate against gays. Their owner does, but he doesn't force his personal beliefs into his business policy. If his company policy was, "no gays allowed to work here", or "we don't serve gays", then I agree 100%, kick the idiots out. This is not the case, and has been stated as such by the owner himself. The Boston Mayor is a bigoted idiot himself, setting a very dangerous precedent. Our mayors do that. And we approve(most of us, at any rate). Boston, #25 city in America in obesity, go MccyDs and be proud.
Pretty much every city in all English speaking countries is full of fat people, doesn't matter so much where you rank.
|
Do we really want to go down that slippery slope?
The free market will punish them if it so decides to, and it has. If they were telling their employees to not serve gay people that would be a different thing, but as it stands, most gay people will just probably not go to that establishment anymore. It's that simple. Most of the time government is best left to do nothing, especially in this kind of situation.
|
It's absurd that a company is making anti-gay statements in the first place, and tries to enforce anti-gay policy. They ought to be sued into the ground. Good for Boston I'd say, its not like this is unprecedented; I'd urge you all to get at least 200 times more outraged over the fact that quite a significant portion of cities make efforts to prevent the establishment of abortion clinics based on their personal beliefs, or try to obstruct the building of non-christian houses of worship.
Both seem worse than banning a company that's basicly calling a group of humans inferior.
|
Boston has a pretty cool reputation because of this kind of things...
|
On July 26 2012 06:24 Birdie wrote:
I bet most of the people saying they think that the company should not be allowed in Boston would also say they are for free speech...
No one ever bans health food companies who advertise against and campaign against obesity; aren't they being discriminatory against a subset of the population? But if a company advertises against and campaigns against homosexuality then the company is immediately demonized. This is pretty clearly a freedom of speech issue and the mayor is against freedom of speech.
I'm not for free speech, actually. I value my right to it more as a result.
Obesity is a personal issue, one that is curable, mendable, fixable. At least for most people.
Homsexuality is none of those things; banning organizations that refuse to accept that is good.
On July 26 2012 06:24 YODA_ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:21 Praetorial wrote:On July 26 2012 06:19 Necro)Phagist( wrote:
Hmm, I'm all for gay marriage and think the fast food restaurant owners are dicks. But I am 100% against the abuse of power here, yes those people suck but let the population tell them that but boycotting their restaurant. You should not be able to ban a company just because they are against your own political agenda. Thats wrong.
Less freedom(Even if it mean enduring something you don't agree with) Is a bad thing. These people how ever bigoted or stupid they are, have the right to belief what they want and own a restaurant as long as they are not actually causing physical harm, which they are not.
Again I'm completely against the organization and their stand points, but they have rights too. If people want to make a bigger statement boycott them. Abusing political power is a slippery slope, one that I don't think we should even for good reasons creep to the edge of. Menino doesn't abuse power. He just hits very hard with it whatever he(and by extension Boston) don't like. And here in Boston, we prefer McDonalds so nobody cares about Chic-fil-a anyway. On July 26 2012 06:20 YODA_ wrote:On July 26 2012 06:14 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote: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. They're not been closed because they're a Christian organisation. They're been closed because they are openly been bigoted to another subsection of society. If my local curry house put posters up encouraging the destruction is Israel and suggesting Jews shouldn't be able to marry then I don't think they should be able to stay open either. See, here is where you are 100% wrong. Chick Fil-A does NOT discriminate against gays. Their owner does, but he doesn't force his personal beliefs into his business policy. If his company policy was, "no gays allowed to work here", or "we don't serve gays", then I agree 100%, kick the idiots out. This is not the case, and has been stated as such by the owner himself. The Boston Mayor is a bigoted idiot himself, setting a very dangerous precedent. Our mayors do that. And we approve(most of us, at any rate). Boston, #25 city in America in obesity, go MccyDs and be proud.
Do you really want to go there?
|
On July 26 2012 06:24 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:20 Gunther wrote:
Anyone else find this funny considering how rude people and unfriendly people from Boston tend to be? Not that being tolerant and plolite/friendly have anything to do with each other. You'd just think maybe they'd be related. We tend to be more progressive, overt, blunt with what we believe in. And from there we base policy-stating exactly what it does. Where do you live-if it's a major city, I'd be happy to provide a sample of stereotyping for you.
Oh I have no doubt that your city is more progressive and generally has a a closer political view to myself than from where I live (the South). It's just in my trips to the up there I encounter a vast amount people who never hold doors open, say thank you, excuse me, etc. My area tends to be considered more racist, poor, uneducated which I'd say is definetly true. And most of us would view people from your area as rude snobs.
|
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.
yup, any company's figureheads that publically come out and make such controversial statements should be able to be open to political backlash as a result of that statement
|
Local politics above most is controlled by special interest groups (NIMBYs, business improvement areas, unions, etc), and these groups run roughshod over anyone that disagrees with them.
This is politics as usual.
|
On July 26 2012 06:24 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:20 Gunther wrote:
Anyone else find this funny considering how rude people and unfriendly people from Boston tend to be? Not that being tolerant and plolite/friendly have anything to do with each other. You'd just think maybe they'd be related. We tend to be more progressive, overt, blunt with what we believe in. And from there we base policy-stating exactly what it does. Where do you live-if it's a major city, I'd be happy to provide a sample of stereotyping for you. Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:22 Necro)Phagist( wrote:On July 26 2012 06:21 Praetorial wrote:On July 26 2012 06:19 Necro)Phagist( wrote:
Hmm, I'm all for gay marriage and think the fast food restaurant owners are dicks. But I am 100% against the abuse of power here, yes those people suck but let the population tell them that but boycotting their restaurant. You should not be able to ban a company just because they are against your own political agenda. Thats wrong.
Less freedom(Even if it mean enduring something you don't agree with) Is a bad thing. These people how ever bigoted or stupid they are, have the right to belief what they want and own a restaurant as long as they are not actually causing physical harm, which they are not.
Again I'm completely against the organization and their stand points, but they have rights too. If people want to make a bigger statement boycott them. Abusing political power is a slippery slope, one that I don't think we should even for good reasons creep to the edge of. Menino doesn't abuse power. He just hits very hard with it whatever he(and by extension Boston) don't like. And here in Boston, we prefer McDonalds so nobody cares about Chic-fil-a anyway. Banning a company from opening up a shop because of their beliefs is an abuse of power. If Boston prefers McDonalds anyway then let them open up shop and lose money for it? Them getting to open a store that doesn't sell any food would be more detrimental to them anyway. No it isn't. And again, getting rid of this restaurant hurts nobody.
It hurts everyone actually. I thought Americans were supposed to be all about freedom? Freedom of speech isn't "You can say what you want as long as it doesn't offend me" Freedom of speech is "You are free to say what you want"
I don't agree with them, but they have the right to belief what they want. Banning their store because of what they belief is flat out wrong.
|
Should take it one step further and block all fast food chains from opening new restaurants. Set a precedent others may follow in a quest to tackle our obesity epidemic from crippling our nation.
|
I'm so sick of hearing gay people complain about everything.
Holy shit stfu.
User was warned for this post
|
On July 26 2012 06:24 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2012 06:20 YODA_ wrote:On July 26 2012 06:14 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote: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. They're not been closed because they're a Christian organisation. They're been closed because they are openly been bigoted to another subsection of society. If my local curry house put posters up encouraging the destruction is Israel and suggesting Jews shouldn't be able to marry then I don't think they should be able to stay open either. See, here is where you are wrong. Chick Fil-A does NOT discriminate against gays. Their owner does, but he doesn't force his personal beliefs into his business policy. If his company policy was, "no gays allowed to work here", or "we don't serve gays", then I agree 100%, kick the idiots out. This is not the case, and has been stated as such by the owner himself. The Boston Mayor is a bigoted idiot himself, setting a very dangerous precedent. I really don't think you can draw the line so easily. Let's pretend that the current ruler of Syria decides to open a restaurant in your town, would you approve of that, do you think your Mayor should let him? No business is 100% separate from the actions of those who own it.
Wait what? I wouldn't give a crap about him opening a restaurant, but I sure wouldn't give him any business. Vote with your money, keep big politics like this out of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
