|
On August 05 2012 21:36 finlurrrr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 14:00 Irave wrote:This Chick-Fil-A scandal has got me worried. I want to go to Arby's but I don't know where they stand on the unrest in Syria Conan O'brien can even see how silly the reactions of this whole Chick-Fil-A thing are. Though this thread has just turned into another gay marriage debate. Totally overlooking the point of this thread, legit. QFT, I can't believe the idiots who are incessantly arguing on and on about this. Just stick to the original topic or let it die, ffs!
it is related, and saying QFT doesnt help it get "back on topic". both the gay marriage debate and the chick fil a thing are about how big a role religion should play in law making in the US. the ban on gay marriage is motivated by the religious people in the country, the numbers show that the older you are, and the more religious you are, the more like you are to oppose gay rights.
now people on who pro gay rights may or may not be overstepping the mark with comments about banning chick fil a from places, and people used to having fun oppressing people are suddenly demanding to be protected by the 1st amendment. but heres the problem. because chick fil a uses its money to support 'hate groups' that are anti gay etc they open themselves up to being regulated. if they were simply a fast food chain it would be impossible to impose any legal restriction on them that wouldnt also affect mcdonalds etc. but since they are active supporters of certain groups, its actually much easier to restrict their growth. it wouldnt be a violation of the 1st amendment to block companies who support anti-gay groups to open near schools or hospitals or parks or whatever, the same restrictions used to keep strip clubs away from kids. strip clubs are "hidden" because they offend the moral values of a lot of americans in a lot of places, chick fil a now does the same.
there is that on topic enough for you?
|
On August 05 2012 17:09 Groog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 15:32 my0s wrote:On August 05 2012 15:06 zalz wrote:
I agree that the government shouldn't be banning companies for their expressed views, that is part of their freedom of speech, but nobody is forced to applaud them for expressing a soon out-dated view. The only reason its even remotely happening now is because gay rights are this year(s) media hot button. Yes, and Black Rights were the media hot button of the late 60's, right? Oh wait...
Some would argue that's still the "hot button topic" of today. Expect to see more and more perceived "racism" in the coming months as we get closer to the election; I guarantee you the race card will be pulled numerous times. And if same-sex couples succeed in their campaign, their card will be pulled many times in the coming decades as well, even after they finally agree with the laws of the land. Media can't ever stop sensationalizing....
|
On August 05 2012 21:54 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 21:36 finlurrrr wrote:On August 05 2012 14:00 Irave wrote:This Chick-Fil-A scandal has got me worried. I want to go to Arby's but I don't know where they stand on the unrest in Syria Conan O'brien can even see how silly the reactions of this whole Chick-Fil-A thing are. Though this thread has just turned into another gay marriage debate. Totally overlooking the point of this thread, legit. QFT, I can't believe the idiots who are incessantly arguing on and on about this. Just stick to the original topic or let it die, ffs! it is related, and saying QFT doesnt help it get "back on topic". both the gay marriage debate and the chick fil a thing are about how big a role religion should play in law making in the US. the ban on gay marriage is motivated by the religious people in the country, the numbers show that the older you are, and the more religious you are, the more like you are to oppose gay rights. now people on who pro gay rights may or may not be overstepping the mark with comments about banning chick fil a from places, and people used to having fun oppressing people are suddenly demanding to be protected by the 1st amendment. but heres the problem. because chick fil a uses its money to support 'hate groups' that are anti gay etc they open themselves up to being regulated. if they were simply a fast food chain it would be impossible to impose any legal restriction on them that wouldnt also affect mcdonalds etc. but since they are active supporters of certain groups, its actually much easier to restrict their growth. it wouldnt be a violation of the 1st amendment to block companies who support anti-gay groups to open near schools or hospitals or parks or whatever, the same restrictions used to keep strip clubs away from kids. strip clubs are "hidden" because they offend the moral values of a lot of americans in a lot of places, chick fil a now does the same. there is that on topic enough for you?
lol love when a foreigner tries to school people on US consitutional law. it would most certainly be a violation of the 1st amendment. It'd be like if a governer in a conservative state said that any business that supports gay marriage is not welcome to open for business in that state. it would be illegal and an abuse of state power.
|
Looks like Chick-fil-A made the smart move and put business ahead of personal beliefs:
"... a memo called "Chick-fil-A: Who We Are" will be distributed to all corporate employees and restaurant operators. The memo will state the company's commitment to "treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their beliefs, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender." It also would state that it is the company's "intent ... not to engage in political or social debates."
As for the funding of "anti-LGBT groups", Chick-fil-A has "promised that its not-for-profit arm would not contribute money to groups that oppose gay marriage."
Article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-chick-fil-a-chicago-0919-20120919,0,3725045.story
|
On August 07 2012 00:05 stratmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 21:54 turdburgler wrote:On August 05 2012 21:36 finlurrrr wrote:On August 05 2012 14:00 Irave wrote:This Chick-Fil-A scandal has got me worried. I want to go to Arby's but I don't know where they stand on the unrest in Syria Conan O'brien can even see how silly the reactions of this whole Chick-Fil-A thing are. Though this thread has just turned into another gay marriage debate. Totally overlooking the point of this thread, legit. QFT, I can't believe the idiots who are incessantly arguing on and on about this. Just stick to the original topic or let it die, ffs! it is related, and saying QFT doesnt help it get "back on topic". both the gay marriage debate and the chick fil a thing are about how big a role religion should play in law making in the US. the ban on gay marriage is motivated by the religious people in the country, the numbers show that the older you are, and the more religious you are, the more like you are to oppose gay rights. now people on who pro gay rights may or may not be overstepping the mark with comments about banning chick fil a from places, and people used to having fun oppressing people are suddenly demanding to be protected by the 1st amendment. but heres the problem. because chick fil a uses its money to support 'hate groups' that are anti gay etc they open themselves up to being regulated. if they were simply a fast food chain it would be impossible to impose any legal restriction on them that wouldnt also affect mcdonalds etc. but since they are active supporters of certain groups, its actually much easier to restrict their growth. it wouldnt be a violation of the 1st amendment to block companies who support anti-gay groups to open near schools or hospitals or parks or whatever, the same restrictions used to keep strip clubs away from kids. strip clubs are "hidden" because they offend the moral values of a lot of americans in a lot of places, chick fil a now does the same. there is that on topic enough for you? lol love when a foreigner tries to school people on US consitutional law. it would most certainly be a violation of the 1st amendment. It'd be like if a governer in a conservative state said that any business that supports gay marriage is not welcome to open for business in that state. it would be illegal and an abuse of state power.
Simply telling someone that they aren't welcome isn't illegal outside of the 3rd grade playground. Also a major difference between supporting gay marriage and not supporting it is one is right and the other is wrong. It's really not even a matter of opinion, it's simply common sense vs stupidity.
|
It's great and all... but this conversation is over a month old...
|
On September 20 2012 03:49 MooseyFate wrote:Looks like Chick-fil-A made the smart move and put business ahead of personal beliefs: "... a memo called "Chick-fil-A: Who We Are" will be distributed to all corporate employees and restaurant operators. The memo will state the company's commitment to "treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their beliefs, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender." It also would state that it is the company's "intent ... not to engage in political or social debates." As for the funding of "anti-LGBT groups", Chick-fil-A has "promised that its not-for-profit arm would not contribute money to groups that oppose gay marriage." Article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-chick-fil-a-chicago-0919-20120919,0,3725045.story
Somehow I'm not surprised, the folks at Chik-Fil-A always struck me as very competent business people and it simply makes no sense for them to continue on with politicization. Although I'm curious if this cycle of declaring a controversial position, profiting on the media buzz, and then backing off will become a mainstay commercial strategy.
|
This entire thread summed up briefily
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!
The week this occured I went out of my way to go to CFA, not becasue I'm instrested in gayVSnongay debates
but because I stand up for their right.
I want to share some words of wisdom past down to me from my father- pretty famous words.
1st they came for the Jews but I was not a Jew so I diid not speak out
Then they came for the communist, but I was not a communist, so I did not speak out
Then they came for the trade unionist, but I was not a trade unionist so I did not speak out
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.
I am, and hope others will BECOME FREE SPEECH, FREE THOUGHT, FREE BELIEF even if it's in opposition to our own views.
Wish CFA much success in future business
|
On September 20 2012 04:11 SayGen wrote:
This entire thread summed up briefily
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!
The week this occured I went out of my way to go to CFA, not becasue I'm instrested in gayVSnongay debates
but because I stand up for their right.
I want to share some words of wisdom past down to me from my father- pretty famous words.
1st they came for the Jews but I was not a Jew so I diid not speak out
Then they came for the communist, but I was not a communist, so I did not speak out
Then they came for the trade unionist, but I was not a trade unionist so I did not speak out
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.
I am, and hope others will BECOME FREE SPEECH, FREE THOUGHT, FREE BELIEF even if it's in opposition to our own views.
Wish CFA much success in future business
Yawn, no one's free speech was ever taken away or threatened. And I'd like to remind you that boycotts are free speech too, you know. In fact, it's not only free speech, but it's free market. If I heard that the governors dared abuse their position (and I wouldn't put it past Rahm who's kind of a dick), then it would be different. I think it's weird that people say that governors shouldn't voice their opinion, when they were essentially elected for their opinions.
And in this case, shockingly enough, it looks like a boycott actually had an effect? Wow. I honestly did not see that coming. Apparently CFA is no longer funding anti-gay organizations. I'd be happy to eat there now. They make good sandwiches.
|
On September 20 2012 04:11 SayGen wrote:
This entire thread summed up briefily
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!
The week this occured I went out of my way to go to CFA, not becasue I'm instrested in gayVSnongay debates
but because I stand up for their right.
I want to share some words of wisdom past down to me from my father- pretty famous words.
1st they came for the Jews but I was not a Jew so I diid not speak out
Then they came for the communist, but I was not a communist, so I did not speak out
Then they came for the trade unionist, but I was not a trade unionist so I did not speak out
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.
I am, and hope others will BECOME FREE SPEECH, FREE THOUGHT, FREE BELIEF even if it's in opposition to our own views.
Wish CFA much success in future business
Chick Fila has the freedom to say whatever they want. By that same token, the consumer has the freedom to publicize those views and comment on them. Chick Fila didn't have their freedom of speech trodden on, quite the opposite. They freely expressed their views. It will cost them dearly, but that's a separate issue.
Nice to see them backpedalling, it was only a matter of time.
|
United States1485 Posts
I don't want to read the whole thread, but did Chick Fil A actually get banned in Boston?
If so, I have no respect for the mayor there whatsoever. And this is coming from a strong supporter of gay marriage and gay rights in general.
|
On September 20 2012 03:49 MooseyFate wrote:Looks like Chick-fil-A made the smart move and put business ahead of personal beliefs: "... a memo called "Chick-fil-A: Who We Are" will be distributed to all corporate employees and restaurant operators. The memo will state the company's commitment to "treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their beliefs, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender." It also would state that it is the company's "intent ... not to engage in political or social debates." As for the funding of "anti-LGBT groups", Chick-fil-A has "promised that its not-for-profit arm would not contribute money to groups that oppose gay marriage." Article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-chick-fil-a-chicago-0919-20120919,0,3725045.story
i want to see the look on mike huckabee's face. that will make my life complete.
|
On September 20 2012 09:46 Voltaire wrote:
I don't want to read the whole thread, but did Chick Fil A actually get banned in Boston?
If so, I have no respect for the mayor there whatsoever. And this is coming from a strong supporter of gay marriage and gay rights in general.
No, nothing happened. The mayor just made a statement denouncing the person's views. There was no action taken, and let's face it: if there was any action taken, lawyers would be all up in the mayor's shit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
