Chick-fil-a mmmm mmm for gays

1. 60

   phionposted 11 years ago

   The mayor of Chicago is weighing in on the statements of a Chick-fil-a big wig. Doesn’t he have more important things to address?
   
   Gay people out there, I have no issue what so ever with you, and hope you find the happiness in life you seek..... but do you really care if a CEO says he believes marriage to be between a man and woman? Isn't that what Obama said before he needed your vote to get reelected? Is this Mayor of one of the most corrupt cities in history just trying to shift focus from his failing city?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I can't speak for gay people but as a citizen it angers me immensely when people, particularly public figures discriminate and practice bigotry, be it sexism, racism or homophobia they are all the same in my book and the people who practice them should be named and boycotted in the public eye to send a very clear message, Americans do not tolerate hate and bigotry, we are better than that and if you want to spread that evil message there will be consequences.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Josak-
         Good stuff, but is it bigotry to say you believe marriage to be between a man and woman? I thought that was just nature. That’s all the chick-fil-a rep was saying.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            To say that you don't believe same sex couples should have the right to marry is intolerance and bigotry. Marriage is a human institution and if we look at nature we can see hundreds of species that practice homosexuality, there simply is no excuse for saying "you are different therefore you have fewer rights" unless the target has violated the rights of others, gay marriage violates no ones rights at all and opposing it is just as bad as being a racist or a sexist, it is saying no, not all men are born equal, some deserve more rights than others, that is a message i have no time or respect for and is ethically and morally wrong.

            replyreport
   2. 59

      Paul Wingertposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The mayor did address an issue. The CEO said something stupid and cost the company a prime location. It had nothing to do with how corrupt the city is and has nothing to do with Obama..

      replyreport
      1. 60

         phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Paul-
         The mayor replied to a question.  Chick-fil-a isn’t losing anything, and it is related to Obama. According to your statement one could ascertain that you believe that anyone who believes Man and Woman joined as the natural course of nature to be wrong, and is in need of boycott.
         
         I bring up Obama, because he had the same beliefs less than a year ago. Just because he is struggling for votes, and changes…I’m sorry “evolved” to his current stance, doesn’t make him any different.

         replyreport
   3. 61

      undermyhatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Every time Americans are allowed a vote on the definition of marriage they, overwhelmingly, support marriage being defined as one man and one woman.  Perhaps Emanuel should ban the American people from Chicago and given the violent crime rate there, perhaps they should be grateful.

      replyreport
   4. 83

      Wayne Brownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Given that the Bible is the recognized reference document for the practice of Christianity, I see no basis for the claim of "bigotry and intolerance" when the Chick-Fil-A organization is simply reaffirming the strong beliefs of the family that established that business and made it an integral part of every community that it joins.  Based on my personal experience in the Chick-A-Fil restaurants, I have never experience a warmer and more inviting customer service approach and I certainly have never seen anyone going around to tables questioning people on their sexual preferences.  I suppose if the representative had simply said that Chick-Fil-A subscribes to the teachings and directives of the Bible that the atheists would be up at arms with that statement.  Luckily, we live in a where we are free to practice our religious beliefs and demonstrate our discipline and desire to follow them.  The mayor of Chicago is not only speaking out, he is taking a stand which is far more intolerate toward a legitimate business in the way that he is stating it than Chick-Fil-A stated beliefs in the teachings of the Bible. This man was put in office to lead and find common ground...not run roughshod over everything that does not match his liberal thinking.  Marriage has a religious connotations and also a legal one.  One is desired and one is required.  All religions and all laws must have some defined parameters if they are going to function.  If we change them everytime someone has a whim or personal need, they soon become baseless.  Today the issue is same-sex marriage...what is it tomorrow...wanting to "marry" your cat or dog?  If the Bible looks upon same sex unions as a sin, then one cannot blame the Chick-Fil-A family...they didn't write the Bible or define the teachings of Christianity but they do subscribe to them.  Does every business in America need a sign in the window that states, "Hey...we're gay-oriented!" in order to engage in the practice of business?  This is not about gay unions, religion, or civil laws...it is about using those items as a platform to put forth an argument designed to essentially require the public to embrace the concept or be labeled for it.  It is nothing less than the process of playing the race card and that one gets played far too often and for all the wrong reasons.  But pull it out and the elected ones run for cover with their tails between their legs.  Every human being deserves to be treated with kindness and respect until they prove otherwise regardless of their personal choices.  I seriously doubt that anyone down at Chick-Fil-A is interested in knowing those personal choices or discriminating against anyone on the basis of them.  Personally, I hope the company decides to move on and leave Chicago behind them in the dust. WB

      replyreport
      1. 61

         undermyhatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Given that the Old Testament is the root of Christianity, Islam and Judaism - it would appear to be intolerant of over 2.5 Billion people to be denied  the right to live by their conscience and religious faith.  Aren't we suppose to be tolerant or is that just tolerably sedate when it comes to issues about which Democrats are certain of their DIVINE teaching?

         replyreport
      2. 74

         Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         That would be fine if the US were a theocracy like Iran.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            undermyhatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It is a Democratic-Republic in which the conscience of the individual is enshrined in its founding documents.  Time and again the American people, when given an opportunity to vote, define marriage as between one Man and one Woman.  It is an undeniable aspect of reality that one's belief system informs ones actions - whether one is Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Wiccan, Atheist, etc...  That has not been outlawed - nor could it actually be outlawed without accomplishing what liberals have never been able to accomplish - reprogram or lock up all opposition.
            
            Rahm Emanuel wishes to impose his personal beliefs on a business that imposes no litmus test for employment but openly embraces Louios Farakahn who is openly hostile about homosexuality.  Why? For the same reason Barrack Obama changed his position on homosexual "marriage" - political expediency.

            replyreport
            1. 74

               Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               People should not have the right to deny other's human and civil rights... period. Again, Emmanuel is not the only person coming out against this. He has as much right as other leaders who impose their personal beliefs on things over and over again.

               replyreport
2. 79

   Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

   We always have the choice of boycotting a business if we don't like their social policies.
   I never drank Coors beer for that reason.
   Won't shop in Walmart.
   Now won't patronize Chick-fil-a.
   
   Maybe this will inspire someone to open a gay-friendly fast food chicken restaurant.
   We can call it Chick-fil-o for "open to all."
   

   replyreport
   1. 60

      phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      MM-
      Is it really reasonable to not eat somewhere because someone that is affiliated with them far away thinks that men are supposed to mate with women?
      
      Should I not hang out with my gay friends, because I am married to a woman?

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         If that someone far away is making compan policy based on their bigoted beliefs, then hell yes!
         I have no doubt I shop at some businesses whose CEOs hold bigoted views. But I don't know about them because they wisely keep their personal beliefs separate from their business. But once they put that info out there, then I know about it. Then I have to make a decision on whether I want to support that business knowing about the bigoted CEO's policies.
         Given the plethora of shopping choices in this country, all things being equal I'd just as soon avoid the bigoted environment.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Agreed... she is a dumb tail for letting this conversation exist, but isn't she just as much an American who is entitled to her beliefs as any of us?  They are closed on Sunday because of religious beliefs. Shall we close them down, or boycott them because they don’t want to serve on Sunday?
            
            Of all the fast food places to spend my money, I can say that Chick fil a has the friendliest, cleanest, overall best experience of all the major fast food chains. These things are what I take into account, not the fake injected ideals of what the media says about them.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Of course she is entitled to her beliefs just as we are entitled to not eat at her store if we disagree with them, closing on Sunday is a personal choice and it does not impact on the rights or equality of anyone else, her comments do.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  JOsak-
                  If you are gay you can still go and get all the chicken you want from them.
                  Since when do an individual’s comments impact the rights or equality of anyone? Literally that is.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Yes but she is publicly supporting a movement/cause that wants to deny people their rights and no doubt there are some empty headed people out there who may have been swayed by the comment.
                     
                     Let me put it this way, if the CEO had come out and said "we support white supremacy" would you feel the same?
                     
                     Simply I don't want my money going to a bigot and many others feel the same way, now we know she is one and our money won't go there.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        The topic stays the same, but I thought I should correct some facts. Mr. Dan Cathy said he supports the “biblical definition of the family unit".
                        That simple statement is the cause for all the hubbub. It was my mistake for saying “her” previously.
                        
                        The case remains, where is the bigotry in that statement?
                        
                        To answer your question…if he said he supported white supremacy, that would be an entirely different conversation. Simply saying you believe in the Bible, and that male and female are the natural occurrence of nature, doesn’t deserve such a response.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Gosh I am an idiot I just read the word Cathy and assumed the CEO was a woman *facepalm*
                           
                           We both know what she said, what she said was that she does not support gay people having the right to marry like straight people can and from her statement we can assume she is also against gay people being allowed to adopt (obviously she thinks the notoriously horrible foster care system is better) as I explained that is saying not all people deserve equal rights even though they have not harmed anyone else. Why is it OK to say that gay people deserve fewer rights but not OK to say black people deserve fewer rights? Both are horribly wrong and equally so, it's the same moral wrong.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Agreed...But I still argue that a Mayor of a major city has better things to deal with than the comments some CEO made in another state.
                              Yes everyone should be able to do what they see fit in their lives, as long as it doesn't stop me from what I want to do in mine.
                              I just wish elected officials would focus on more pressing issues, instead of getting involved in driving a wedge deeper between Americans.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Equality is a pressing issue, until all Americans are equal none of us are equal and that is a horrible shame and black mark on this country.

                                 replyreport
                              2. 74

                                 Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 So it's fine when an organization donates large amounts of your money to deny people the right to get married?
                                 Chicago is not the only city speaking out against it.

                                 replyreport
                           2. 55

                              ftclickposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Deleted
                              1. 74

                                 Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Why is it different? Gay people have as much choice as blacks in the way they are. Yes, of course it's easier tell right away when someone is a different color, that is the only difference.

                                 replyreport
                           3. 55

                              ftclickposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Looks like my original comment was deleted. There was no hate nor aggression.  hmmm? 
                              "Why is it OK to say that gay people deserve fewer rights but not OK to say black people deserve fewer rights?" My mistake my rant was on levels of discrimination between blacks and gays.
                              
                              Marriage was taught to be an institution between a man and a woman from my recollection. You want to change then so be it. It is a relic union anyway. If the man and woman phrase was never written in law, then yes I have to agree it is not fair.
                              No I don't eat a Chic-Fil-e. Yes, I frequent places where there's a gay population and participate.

                              replyreport
                              1. 61

                                 undermyhatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 No one is barred from getting married, as long as one is marrying a member of the opposite sex.  That is the sole definition and criteria for marriage.  One man, one woman.  It does not bar people based on race, sexual orientation, income, wealth, ethnicity, national origin, age(except the age of consent), number of working limbs, blindness, deafness, disease, etc....
                                 
                                 If anything marriage is one of the most inclusive institutions in America.  Time was when a man could not marry a woman if they were of different "races."  That is gone.  Now it is perfectly inclusive.  The government doesn't ask if  you love each other, if you want children, if it is all about publically validating your sexuality, if it is about property, or income or what ever - as long as it isn't about fraud.
                                 
                                 Simple and objective marriage is one man and one woman and no other issues at all.  How could it be more fair?

                                 replyreport
      2. 57

         MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I would say it's reasonable to eat or not eat anywhere one wants to for whatever reason they feel is appropriate.
         
         Chick-fil-a made their opinions public... I'm sure their are plenty of religious people who are going to be more likely to visit the place because of their views (and I'm sure Chick-fil-a is well-aware of that)... So why should the flip side be any different?
         
         When you mix religion with business then you risk offending any customer base with a different philosophy.  If they get boycotted or lose business because of it maybe they will learn to stick to making chicken rather than preaching.

         replyreport
   2. 57

      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Or for me... Chick-feel-gay...  I wouldn't eat there every-day mind you... just when the mood struck.
      
      (bi-humour is great)

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
   3. 61

      undermyhatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I like your take on this in so far as it is the free market that punishes and rewards.  I do not watch television shows that bore or offend me.  i don't listen to radio that bores or offends me.  i don't read buy products from those whose publici opinions offend me.  I like that one is FREE to do these things.
      
      I may not agrees with what you say but I will fight for your right to say it and I will with hold my dollars from your business as the price for my disagreement.
      
      Seems to me the murder rate in Chicago would consume all of Rohm Emanuel's attention.  So Chicago can afford to push a potential employer out of Chicago.  Lucky them.

      replyreport
3. 55

   ftclickposted 11 years ago

   So the Bible was wrong too?
   "particularly public figures discriminate and practice bigotry,"
   
   A new generation thinks now same-sex marriage should be legal everywhere or they cry discrimination and racism. Nobody really thought anti-gay marriage was discrimination and knew deep down it is morally wrong like they knew slavery was wrong or forced to sit in the back of the bus or lynched like Africans were. It is not ethnic discrimination or cleansing like Syria or Bosnia/Croatia or in African countries.
   
   Why stop there? grant marriage rights to your pet dogs if they live in the same household, the lawyers should appoint executors of their estate if the owners die.
   
   I am not a churchgoer or condemned to go you know where since I do not practice nor do I hate gays. In fact, I don't mind working, living among, or doing any outdoor sports activity with them. Marriage between gays to me is wrong. So, with my background am I racist or a bigot?  No. And if you say so, it doesn't validate it. If the law passes let it, (B_D as Lisa Lamponelli says).
   How is this issue handled for gay parents: one of the men will never be considered a mom and in lesbian cases never be a dad. I have read the studies of kids of gay parents and how there is not much difference. Do the kids once over 18 have issues when referring to their gay Dads among friends?
   
   In the argument of the bible,( funny coming from me) religion is dying / waning worldwide so the concept of marriage is too. Gay marriage should have been approved decades ago (w/ civil rights)  to make it easier accepted today. I think it just might be too late. Otherwise, it makes marriage a farce and only necessary to save on personal income annual taxes and pass-through inheritance tax savings. Yes they deserve benefits too. Gee, I am talking myself into it.  I am outta here but never to Chic-Fil-e.

   replyreport