DC Tom Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 Now it's "the war on gays?" It's an improvement. Used to be the "Gay Holocaust".
B-Man Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 Forget the Gay arguement for a minute, make it anything, abortion, pro-gun,...... anything. ChickaFil has NEVER had a example of discrimination in their business. NOT in service.........NOT in employees. If they did THEN there could be cause for municipal or state concern BUT, NONE OF THAT HAS HAPPENED. The owners of the business simply stated their verbal and monatary support for marriage being between a man and a woman...............as is their constitutional right. This is an incredibly slippery slope ! If the mayors of Boston and Chicago can decide that they can keep out a business, which HASN'T broken any laws, just because they don't agree with the views of the owners. This could be bad........We should support Chickafil (not because of their views) but because of their rights , and ours. and its good chicken. .
WorldTraveller Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 It's an improvement. Used to be the "Gay Holocaust". Funny you say this, I just read a good article today that is somewhat connected: Move over, Iraq. Tribal politics have arrived at home. It’s not like our tribes will arm themselves, but American politics is developing a disturbing resemblance to Mesopotamia’s ever-feuding Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds as the 2012 election rapidly devolves into a power struggle between irreconcilable factions rather than a healthy debate among citizens. The blame here falls in large part on President Barack Obama, who after four years of economic lethargy needs to recast the election as anything other than what it naturally is: a referendum on the incumbent and the state of the nation. To turn the page, he has revived the kind of divisive 50 percent–plus–one politics Bush political guru Karl Rove successfully championed in 2004. As former George W. Bush strategist Mark McKinnon has observed, Obama is now following the same playbook used in 2004 against another Massachusetts faux blueblood, Sen. John Kerry. Like Obama, Bush was a polarizing president of meager accomplishments and modest popularity. And like Bush, Obama is hoping to rally his base and demonize his opponent to achieve a fairly comfortable reelection. Click to learn more... To do that, Obama is offering an array of appeals based on tribal totems—gay marriage, contraception, cheap loans for kids, charges of racism by his opponents. Every “grand” statement is aimed at specific groups, either to offer them something or to show how Romney would threaten their interests. It’s a self-perpetuating dynamic: as he’s aimed his appeal at targeted groups to cobble together a winning coalition, he’s consistently lost ground with middle- and lower-income white Americans. That in turn compels him to double down on his appeals to single women, gays, youth, and minority voters—which in turn further alienates working and retired white voters. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/24/the-tribal-election-barack-obama-turns-to-the-karl-rove-playbook.html
B-Man Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 “If the mayor of a conservative town tried to keep out gay-friendly Starbucks or Apple, it would be an outrage.” Except that doesn’t seem to happen, does it? What I think is funny is that if you have the same view on gay marriage that Obama had when he was elected, now you’re an enemy of humanity or something. Ann Althouse Boston Globe Menino shouldn’t block Chick-fil-A because of president’s views The president of Chick-fil-A opposes gay marriage. While this view goes against the grain in a state that made history by embracing it, it’s no reason for Mayor Thomas M. Menino to oppose a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Boston. The fast food chicken sandwich chain was reportedly looking at property near Faneuil Hall at the location where the Purple Shamrock currently operates. Then company president Dan Cathy stirred national controversy when he said in an interview that “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.” In response, Menino told the Boston Herald, “Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston. You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that discriminates against a population. We’re an open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion.” But which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license. Chick-fil-A must follow all state and city laws. If the restaurant chain denied service to gay patrons or refused to hire gay employees, Menino’s outrage would be fitting. And the company should be held to its statement that it strives to “treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation, or gender.” But beyond the fact that Chick-fil-A is closed on Sundays, the religious beliefs of the company’s top executive don’t appear to control its operations. Ironically, Menino is citing the specific location along the Freedom Trail as a reason to block Chick-fil-A. A city in which business owners must pass a political litmus test is the antithesis of what the Freedom Trail represents.
IDBillzFan Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) If the mayors of Boston and Chicago can decide that they can keep out a business, which HASN'T broken any laws, just because they don't agree with the views of the owners. This is truly the essence of the issue. Not to mention, how unbelievably shallow and idiotic do you need to be to be in charge of a city with 9.8% unemployment and tell people you don't want them to open a business there because you disagree with their definition of marriage. Murder little girls selling candy on the road? Not a problem. Believe that marriage is only between a man and woman? Go away. Edited July 26, 2012 by LABillzFan
Nanker Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) I can't wait for the Holder Justice Department to press charges against Rahm et al on their unconstitutional restraint of interstate commerce. edit: It's illegal to discriminate based on race, color, or CREED. CREED: A system of belief, religion, principles, articles of faith, doctrine, teaching, dogma, tenets, canons. Bring it on B word! Edited July 26, 2012 by Nanker
The Big Cat Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 FWIW, Rahm and the alderman who have come out against this are catching a lot of flack here locally. It's very bizzarre and a lot of people in Chicago are scratching their heads over it. Nobody thinks the public outcry for this was a.) warranted or b.) in the least bit prudent.
DC Tom Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 FWIW, Rahm and the alderman who have come out against this are catching a lot of flack here locally. It's very bizzarre and a lot of people in Chicago are scratching their heads over it. Nobody thinks the public outcry for this was a.) warranted or b.) in the least bit prudent. It starts to make sense when you ask yourself "Is Rahm campaigning for Obama?" But only starts to...it's not like Obama doesn't have Chicago wrapped up already.
WorldTraveller Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 People are free to do what they like, and I won't be crowing about this subject, however, it does fit into the article that I linked, it's the election strategy, winning one segment of the population at a time.
The Big Cat Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 It starts to make sense when you ask yourself "Is Rahm campaigning for Obama?" But only starts to...it's not like Obama doesn't have Chicago wrapped up already. Yeah, Obama doesn't need any help here in Chicago. And this just came out today: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20120726/BLOGS02/120729826/obama-holds-20-point-margin-over-romney-in-illinois so it seems even Illinois (red as red gets below I-80) is locked up, too.
IDBillzFan Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 People are free to do what they like, and I won't be crowing about this subject, however, it does fit into the article that I linked, it's the election strategy, winning one segment of the population at a time. I heard Dick Morris almost a year ago predict the Obama plan would be "hunker in the bunker". Not a big fan of listening to Morris, but he nailed this.
B-Large Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 Wait, so Chick-fil-A is actively discriminating against homosexuals? Do they not serve them at all, or is there a special seating area? They have a different section where the bar stools are upside down...
WorldTraveller Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 They have a different section where the bar stools are upside down... That was actually kinda funny
Joe Miner Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 They have a different section where the bar stools are upside down... That's the "Seating Efficiency" section. 4 times as many people in 1 section. It's a little tight at first, but once inside, you might start to enjoy it more than the regular method.
B-Large Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 That was actually kinda funny That's the "Seating Efficiency" section. 4 times as many people in 1 section. It's a little tight at first, but once inside, you might start to enjoy it more than the regular method. They are not discriminatory, they are !@#$ing efficiency pioneers... 16 guys at a table for 4... genius LOL That was actually kinda funny even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while, Traveller...
Nanker Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) It starts to make sense when you ask yourself "Is Rahm campaigning for Obama?" But only starts to...it's not like Obama doesn't have Chicago wrapped up already. Actually, Rahm is beginning his own campaign 2016. He's got to outmaneuver the America's most progressive other mayor - Mike Bloomberg - who has more money than Romney and will switch back to the Demo party at the drop of a hat, or cigarette butt, or 16 oz. soft drink cup, or a shaker of table salt, or a dollop of trans fatty acid laden kitchen grease. They are not discriminatory, they are !@#$ing efficiency pioneers... 16 guys at a table for 4... genius LOL even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while, Traveller... Just don't say yes, when someone asks if they can push in your stool. Edited July 26, 2012 by Nanker
WorldTraveller Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 You know there is insurrection in the ranks when Mother Jones begins to criticize your decision
B-Large Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) Actually, Rahm is beginning his own campaign 2016. He's got to outmaneuver the America's most progressive other mayor - Mike Bloomberg - who has more money than Romney and will switch back to the Demo party at the drop of a hat, or cigarette butt, or 16 oz. soft drink cup, or a shaker of table salt, or a dollop of trans fatty acid laden kitchen grease. Just don't say yes, when someone asks if they can push in your stool. "Can I push in the Stool for you sir?" "Why, yes, how thoughtful... Edited July 26, 2012 by B-Large
RkFast Posted July 27, 2012 Posted July 27, 2012 Yeah, even the most ardent pro-gay folks are thinking that what these Mayors are doing doesnt fly. Doesnt help when one mayor crows about "diveristy" when hes running one of the most racially divided cities in the Country...and another crows about how CFA doesnt meet his cities "values"....and then ge calls in Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam to help with the city's security
Chef Jim Posted July 28, 2012 Posted July 28, 2012 This tweet from SF mayor Ed Lee really pisses me off: Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer Really Ed? What are you going to do if they decide to open one closer. Is 39 miles too close? How about 37.5?? What a !@#$ing idiot.
Recommended Posts