Chick-fil-a and the homophobic sandwich

Post Reply New Topic

So he is spending his money the way he wants to. What is wrong with that? Do you think we should spend our money the way someone else wants us to?

If you find his politics disagreeable do not patronize his businesses.

ruveyn

I never said I agreed with Dan Cathy's thoughts. Or how he spends some his money. Take your money thoughts out of the picture, because my comment had nothing to do with finances whatsoever. Looking strictly at what was said in that interview, he never bluntly stated "I hate gays". Therefore, his words are not indicative of hate. But by stating that he believes in the biblical definition of marriage and family, he is in disagreement when it comes to supporting same-sex marriage.

As I recall, David Duke denied actually hating black Americans, but I think we all know what his actual position on that subject is.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

They've ALWAYS been mean and selfish, but now they're worse than ever. We are living in the Age of Narcissism.

Well, I still stand by my argument. Still there is always the Charlie Daniels "Uneasy Rider" option, "I went to LA, via Omaha."

*rolls eyes

1. David Duke was a Democrat that tried to run as a Republican and the Republican party actively sabotaged his campaign.
2. The CEO of Chik'fil'a is not David Duke


In case you hadn't noticed homosexuality is considered a sin in the Bible, the franchise is still in private ownership, they close their restaurants on Sundays for crying out loud.

He was asked a question point blank, and he answered it honestly, if anyone was the intolerant bigots it was the people calling for the restaurant to be boycotted and legal action taken against them to get them thrown out of cities...

David Duke had been one of the old southern Democrats who had since switched to being Republicans.
And as far as making the comparison to Duke is concerned, I was simply pointing out that he has in the past denied hating anyone - even though I doubt anyone seriously believes that. I think the same case can be made with the chicken boss guy.
And I could care less if the Bible calls homosexuality a sin or not - this is a matter of a powerful CEO using his power and influence to deny rights to gay Americans - many of whom at one time were probably his customers. Not a very smart business plan, even if he was just answering honestly. He has the right to say he's against interracial marriage - but there are repercussions for expressing such opinions.
And what's possibly wrong with boycotting certain businesses that take stands you oppose? That's as American as apple pie.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Explains why the Republican party sabotaged his campaign and actually aired campaign ads urging people to vote for the Democrat over him.



Either that is a poor attempt at sarcasm, or you just admitted to dishonestly comparing the CEO of Chik'fil'a to being the same as David Duke, which he isn't. Which is it?



Actually, based on your comments, I could make a much better case accusing you of being an anti-Christian bigot... The man is an American Citizen, his right to free speech is protected under the 1st amendment as is his religious freedom. He was asked a question on the subject point blank and answered the question honestly.

I'm going to be quite blunt and point out there is a pretty big difference between one's chosen sexual orientation and skin color. Skin color is a simple difference in skin pigmentation, it is something you are born with, not something you have chosen. You choose who you climb into bed with. Homosexual behavior is a behavior, you choose to act on those urges.



Yes and no, while it is okay for someone like you to call for a boycott, the left crossed the line and demonstrated that they are the intolerant ones, the reason there was a massive backlash towards liberals and massive support for Chik'fil'a is cause you had left wing kooks whom were in government trying to take retailiatory action simply because a man exercised his 1st amendment rights and happened to be a Christian.

If the CEO was Muslim, there wouldn't have been any calls for a boycott, however since he was a Christian there was an uproar showing how many liberals are anti-Christian bigots.

Okay, so I'm an Anti-Christian bigot - my pastor, who I saw in both Bible study and in church would probably dispute that with you.
And as far as any comparison to David Duke is concerned - I reiterate, I was only demonstrating
how Duke denied hating black people, the same way as the Chick-fil-a CEO might say he doesn't really hate gay people. My point being, both are disingenuous. I was hardly saying that the two men are absolutely two of a kind.
And no, the chicken boss' religion has nothing to do with my abhorrence toward his homophobic stance. If the guy was a Muslim, he'd still be ripped to shreds by the left.
As for homosexuality being a choice - even if that were true, so what? Americans should be afforded equal rights, regardless of who they are, or who they love.
And in closing - how is expressing disapproval of bigotry constitute bigotry? Was the business Chich-fil-a got really in support of the CEO's rights of speech and religion? Or was it more in support of taking a stance in favor of homophobia? I tend to think of it as the latter.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichgauer, when a mayor of a city threatens to bar a restaurant from continuing to operate in a city due to the CEO's religious beliefs, that is a violation of the 1st Amendment, even the ACLU acknowledged that Chik-fil-a could sue the hell out of more than one Democrat-run cities and would have a slamdunk case.

Fact is, the guy was asked a question by a religious organization and the man answered. In case you hadn't figured out Chik-fil-a isn't exactly a publicly traded franchise, they are still privately owned. They close all their restaurants on Sundays for crying out loud, under religious scripture Homosexuality is a sinful behavior.

Fact of the matter is we wouldn't have seen a peep from the left if the CEO was Muslim. Only reason the left made a stink about it was the fact the CEO was Christian, and the left thinks discriminating against Christians is perfectly acceptible.

Actually, such a threat is not a violation of anything. And even if Chik-fil-a or a franchisee were to apply for zoning permission to open a restaurant, and were the city to refuse it on that basis, the issue would not be a first amendment one--the city isn't purporting to curtail the right of free speech--it would be a fourteenth amendment issue of equal protection.



So far as I am aware no one has ever suggested that he is not entitled to his opinion and the free expression of it. And no one has, to my knowledge, taken a decision that discriminates against him or his company on that basis.

But if he is entitled to his first amendment right to express himself, so are all of those people who are encouraging a boycott of his business. I, for one, will choose not to do business with someone who diverts a portion of his profits into causes with which I fundamentally disagree. That isn't discrimination--it's consumer choice.

Wrong visagrunt, using one's political office to try to intimidate a private citizen simply cause you don't agree with their religious beliefs is actually illegal in the United States.



Where the heck do you get your news?!?! Cause even the TIMES reported on it.

“Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston,” Menino told the Boston Herald on Thursday. “You can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against the population. We’re an open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion. That’s the Freedom Trail. That’s where it all started right here. And we’re not going to have a company, Chick-fil-A or whatever the hell the name is, on our Freedom Trail.”

Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/07/23/bos ... z266EhcYWo

Then we had politicians in Chicago pull a similar stunt.

A Chicago politician said he will block Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in his ward, following anti-gay marriage remarks by the fast food chain's president.

Alderman Joe Moreno, who represents Chicago's Logan Square neighborhood, plans to use his aldermanic privilege, a Chicago tradition in which City Council members defer to aldermen on local matters, to block the restaurant's permit.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/chick-fi ... d=16853890




Also people have a right to thumb their nose right back at the people calling for a boycott, and the politicians which crossed the line. Fact of the matter is, Chik-fil-a not only wasn't hurt at all by the "boycott" they actually had record sales, I think people are fed up with the left trying to intimidate people.

Visigrunt addressed your counter attack well enough. But how do you know the left wouldn't react the same way if the CEO was a Muslim? Just because Limbaugh and Beck told you that?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Actually, visagrunt's counter was demolished, he lost credibility when he said that politicians didn't use their positions of power to try to discriminate against Chik-fil-a, I provided two instances, and I know there are a few more.

Also Kraichgauer it is fairly obvious considering how supportive many media outlets were of that Muslim "Outreach Center" being put at ground zero in New York City...

Can you demonstrate intimadation in these statements? I see nothing of the kind. So far, all I see is political posturing.



Reported on what, pray? So far as I have read, all that has happened is that a bunch of letters have been written and politicians have taken up posturing. Point me at a story of Chik-fil-a or one of its franchisees being applying for and being denied permission to open a restaurant, and I will change my view. But so far, I know of no reports that applications to do so have been made and refused.



When have I ever suggested otherwise?

Inuyasha@
Those Muslim Americans were actually the victims of Anti-Muslim hysteria in which their religious rights were being threatened by a mob mentality for wanting to build Islamic centers several blocks away from ground zero. In the case of Chick-fil-a, the chicken boss was promoting discrimination against other Americans who happen to be gay. Not the same thing, by any means.
And I reiterate, the left and the media would have reacted the same way if the CEO had been a Muslim.Just remember when Ajha... Ajhem... that crazy as*hole who runs Iran had said there were no homosexuals in Iran - at a time when gay Iranians were being publicly hanged. The left and the media were all over him like flies on fly paper.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer