EPTChick-Fil-A -> Chickfiller? ... lol
Boston Mayor vows to ban Chick-Fil-A from his city - Page 30
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Kuni
Austria765 Posts
Chick-Fil-A -> Chickfiller? ... lol | ||
|
ControlMonkey
Australia3109 Posts
On July 26 2012 18:40 solidbebe wrote: They're allowed to, but they should't expect no repercussions on them as a company taking such a stance. Just like people/cities could retaliate against google for taking their stance. Though I don't think anyone has done that yet ( that I know of) aside from the 'I won't be buying google products anymore'. They should surely expect no repercussions from the Government. People are free to tell them to go away & protest etc, but not the Government. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
On July 26 2012 17:58 ControlMonkey wrote: I don't see how it is proper for an ELECTED GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL to prevent a company from setting up shop in their town because they advocate against changes in the law regarding marriage, donate to anti-gay groups and say nasty things about gay people. ... Is it the role of Government to prevent the business activities of any person or company because they are bigots, who advocate changing the law to discriminate against others, but are doing nothing illegal? Certainly not. Actually, that is exactly the role of the mayor, the elected representative and manager of the city of Boston, to project the will of his city's people. He's not doing this solely because he believes it's wrong, but also because he knows the people who voted for him believe it's wrong. That's the way US politics works. And for what it's worth, gay marriage is 100% LEGAL in Massacheusetts. This company is basically fighting to overturn a law that exists in this mayor's home city. It is totally reasonable and logical for the mayor to protect the interests of Boston--one of the most liberal cities in America--by keeping that company the fuck out. | ||
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
We are in the midst of an age old push and pull. Not everybody who was a racist slave holder was a bad person. Not everybody who shackled their wives to the bed and stove was a bad person. Not every person who wants relegate gays to second class citizenship is a bad person. These people are just victims of an antiquated misinformed belief system and beliefs are hard to change. Many of us, especially in Boston, are ahead of the curve. And while there is no doubt as to who is right and who is wrong, we still have to live peacefully by working within the system whenever possible and resorting to civil disobedience in only the most constructive ways. I don't know if what the mayor is doing is right (the technical and moral are pretty intertwined here) but on a human level, if I looked into the world and saw widespread needless suffering and had the power to help I would be hard pressed not to. | ||
|
FoxShine
United States156 Posts
| ||
|
Ashakyre
United States99 Posts
Regarding abuses of power, welcome to big city politics people. In Boston this is nothing. Try getting anything done without City Hall on your side. | ||
|
m4inbrain
1505 Posts
But, then again, i dont think that companies should openly support "groups" that discriminate certain kind of people. Which is actually really disgusting. | ||
|
r_con
United States824 Posts
| ||
|
m4inbrain
1505 Posts
Its actually that easy. | ||
|
PraetorianBigot
2 Posts
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. -tolerant -educated Swing and a miss on those two. Not tolerating another parties beliefs, and too stupid to realize that you're doing the same thing you're pissed off about somebody else doing. gg User was banned for this post. | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
On July 26 2012 20:21 PraetorianBigot wrote: -tolerant -educated Swing and a miss on those two. Not tolerating another parties beliefs, and too stupid to realize that you're doing the same thing you're pissed off about somebody else doing. gg Being intolerant of intolerance is good. Being a bigot isn't. | ||
|
PraetorianBigot
2 Posts
On July 26 2012 20:24 SnipedSoul wrote: Being intolerant of intolerance is good. Being a bigot isn't. Being intolerant of intolerance is bigotry, pick up a dictionary. | ||
|
ControlMonkey
Australia3109 Posts
On July 26 2012 19:31 Cel.erity wrote: Actually, that is exactly the role of the mayor, the elected representative and manager of the city of Boston, to project the will of his city's people. He's not doing this solely because he believes it's wrong, but also because he knows the people who voted for him believe it's wrong. That's the way US politics works. And for what it's worth, gay marriage is 100% LEGAL in Massacheusetts. This company is basically fighting to overturn a law that exists in this mayor's home city. It is totally reasonable and logical for the mayor to protect the interests of Boston--one of the most liberal cities in America--by keeping that company the fuck out. I don't believe it is the role of the Mayor to project the will of the people. It is his job to manage the city. That will usually involve doing what the people want, sure. But when you restrict the freedom of someone for no reason, other than the fact that their religious/political/personal beliefs conflict with the majority of the city, surely that is not appropriate? Surely the principles of individual freedom come before protecting the sensibilities of the people of his city? My point is that if we just said "you're in the minority STFU, we are going to let the government restrict your freedom" then being gay would probably still be illegal, certainly in some parts of America. Also, saying that people are not allowed to lobby to get the law changed is just wrong. If pro-gay protestors can protest to have the law changed to allow gay marriage, surely it works both ways? | ||
|
Mr Showtime
United States1353 Posts
On July 26 2012 06:01 Zaqwert wrote: 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. This isn't Government policy based on personal preference. It's specifically to combat this disgusting level of bigotry. People who are anti-gay are as tolerated as the racists of the United States back in the early 1900s. It's only a matter of time before people realize how absurd this is and laws, such as the one passed in North Carolina banning gay marriage, are deemed unconstitutional and nullified. I understand that this is only my opinion and not a fact, but seriously. Look at the civil rights movement and this gay rights movement. It's the same fucking thing all over again, but people are too stupid to realize that everyone should be treated as equals. In the 50s, too many thought it should be 'all but blacks' are treated equal, and now, the same fucking thing, 'all but gays' should be treated equal. Absolutely moronic behavior. | ||
|
S_SienZ
1878 Posts
When you contribute lots of money to a certain cause, it's no longer JUST AN OPINION. | ||
|
Felnarion
442 Posts
On July 26 2012 20:30 Mr Showtime wrote: This isn't Government policy based on personal preference. It's specifically to combat this disgusting level of bigotry. People who are anti-gay are as tolerated as the racists of the United States back in the early 1900s. It's only a matter of time before people realize how absurd this is and laws, such as the one passed in North Carolina banning gay marriage, are deemed unconstitutional and nullified. I understand that this is only my opinion and not a fact, but seriously. Look at the civil rights movement and this gay rights movement. It's the same fucking thing all over again, but people are too stupid to realize that everyone should be treated as equals. In the 50s, too many thought it should be 'all but blacks' are treated equal, and now, the same fucking thing, 'all but gays' should be treated equal. Absolutely moronic behavior. No no no. "Kill those faggots" is a disgusting level of bigotry. That's something you can stop. Civil rights and gay rights are siginificantly different. The civil rights of blacks in America were being consistently targeted. They couldn't get jobs, couldn't eat where they want, could barely exist in a reasonable capacity. This is whether or not gays can legally be recognized as married by the state. That's not even close to the atrocities to blacks. If a gay/athiest person applies at Chick-FIl-A, they can be hired. If they go in to eat, they will eat. The only thing chick-fil-a does not want is a recognition by the state of same-sex marriage. While this is a flawed stance, in my eyes, its perfectly within their rights to hold this stance. And while they should be ridiculed for being out dated, government leaders should stay out of it. It's absolutely the case that this is "Freedom of speech until I don't agree with you" As long as they aren't advocating harm to anyone, they are within their rights to express an opinion on what they believe the functions of government should be. For me? My opinion? I do not believe the state should have any role in the union of two people, regardless of sex. EDIT: I understand that no action has been taken by the mayor in this case. And I support his right to send out a letter to chick-fil-a voicing his opinion. However, I believe he stepped over the line in saying that the company was "Not welcome", as well as sending it on his official letterhead. | ||
|
SiroKO
France721 Posts
You had the right to freely express yourself as long as you were a zionist and an economic liberal. Now you have to be culturally liberal as well, in other words believing in the destruction of all patriarchal values among western nations, excluding Israel ofc. By the way, it's kind of funny how some people want to physically shut down others merely voicing an opinion while complaining about bigotry. | ||
|
m4inbrain
1505 Posts
On July 26 2012 21:14 Felnarion wrote: No no no. "Kill those faggots" is a disgusting level of bigotry. That's something you can stop. Civil rights and gay rights are siginificantly different. The civil rights of blacks in America were being consistently targeted. They couldn't get jobs, couldn't eat where they want, could barely exist in a reasonable capacity. This is whether or not gays can legally be recognized as married by the state. That's not even close to the atrocities to blacks. If a gay/athiest person applies at Chick-FIl-A, they can be hired. If they go in to eat, they will eat. The only thing chick-fil-a does not want is a recognition by the state of same-sex marriage. While this is a flawed stance, in my eyes, its perfectly within their rights to hold this stance. And while they should be ridiculed for being out dated, government leaders should stay out of it. It's absolutely the case that this is "Freedom of speech until I don't agree with you" As long as they aren't advocating harm to anyone, they are within their rights to express an opinion on what they believe the functions of government should be. For me? My opinion? I do not believe the state should have any role in the union of two people, regardless of sex. EDIT: I understand that no action has been taken by the mayor in this case. And I support his right to send out a letter to chick-fil-a voicing his opinion. However, I believe he stepped over the line in saying that the company was "Not welcome", as well as sending it on his official letterhead. The point is, they are not just voicing an opinion. They're throwing money at organisations who work active against gay-rights. Theres a huge difference, im sorry. Of course they can express their opinion, but as soon as you try to be active and change something, its not just an opinion anymore, but a "crusade" (its not the right word, but im not a native english speaker and i couldnt find the right one). Edit: for example, Sea Shephard is not just voicing an opinion. They are fighting against something (and they are right, but thats not the point here). And i donate money to them, so they can fight more/harder/again, whatever. I do not just express my opinion and say "they're doing the right thing". | ||
|
sereniity
Sweden1159 Posts
On July 26 2012 06:59 Birdie wrote: I don't understand why people are calling this bigotry; he's just standing up for what he believes in. He can't easily change what he believes in any more than homosexuals can easily change their sexuality; beliefs are much stronger than, say, what kind of burger you like. He's using his business to publicize his beliefs, and he's using his business to donate to anti-gay charities, therefore his business gets banned from a place that doesn't support the business' beliefs. If this company wants to be able to open everywhere, they shouldn't involve politics in their business. If they would open in Boston, some people would most likely buy food there which would mean that Boston is indirectly supporting their beliefs and contributing to their donations to anti-gay charities. It's simple really... KwarK said it best in the first page, shame people chose to ignore that. | ||
| ||
