Fast Food chain under fire from same sex couples

scudzilla

Now this just makes me sick

http://news.sky.com/story/967831/fast-food-chain-under-fire-over-gay-marriage

Basically the president of this fast food chain has said he was he was "guilty as charged" of backing "the biblical definition" of marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Not once has he said any same sex couples are banned from his restaurants, not once has he slagged them off, all he has said, is that in his opinion, and that of the bible, it's wrong. Now critics are planning a "Same Sex Kiss In" outside all the branches!!

What is the world coming to? Are we not allowed to hold an opinion anymore without being jumped on by some sort of Human Rights group demanding equailty?

Full Article :
Critics of a US fast food chain's stance on gay marriage are planning a national mass same-sex "kiss-in" outside branches.

The president of Chick-fil-A sparked protests and boycotts across the country after admitting he was "guilty as charged" of backing "the biblical definition" of marriage as being between a man and a woman.

It has reignited the debate over gay marriage in the United States and even prompted some cities to declare that the company is not welcome to open new restaurants.

Supporters of the chain's position staged a "Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day" on Wednesday and restaurants were swamped by customers sympathetic to their views.

At a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Largo in Maryland customer Porfy Beltran told Sky News: "The people who work there and the people who run the company should be free to believe whatever they believe.

"To try to boycott them because of what they believe is actually fascism and we fought a war against fascism and I don't want to go through that again."

On Friday, critics of the company, whose slogan is 'Eat Mor Chiks', are planning to hold a ‘Kiss Mor Chiks' event, encouraging people to turn up outside restaurants around the country and kiss each other.

Former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has weighed in on the issue telling Fox News that the Chick-fil-A chief was being "crucified" for his views.

New York mayor Michael Bloomberg has criticised leaders in Chicago, Boston and San Francisco for saying Chick-fil-A is not welcome in their cities.

He said it was inappropriate for a government "to look at somebody's political views and decide whether or not they can live in the city, or operate a business in the city, or work for somebody in the city".

He won support from one of the leading voices behind calls for a boycott.

Richard Socarides, a former gay rights advisor to President Bill Clinton, said: "Consumers can disagree with a company's corporate political position and decide not to spend money there.

"But the city cannot regulate speech by denying someone a permit to operate their business just because you disagree with their political beliefs."

Most of Chick-fil-A's restaurants are in the southern 'Bible Belt' with only a dozen in states which allow gay marriage.

The latest opinion polls show Americans evenly divided on the issue of gay marriage. In May, President Barack Obama announced that he supported the rights of same-sex couples to marry.

Jesus Wept

This.
That is all.

scudzilla

Andy Carroll wrote: »

This.
That is all.

But the Fast Food chain DOESN'T have a stance, the head guy just said he doesn't agree with it!!

Atlantis50

"In May, President Barack Obama announced that he supported the rights of same-sex couples to marry."

Funny how the Chick-Fil-A guy expressed the exact same sentiments as Obama in 2008 yet there was very little protest over Obama's view 'as a Christian' that 'marriage is between a man and a woman'.

Where were the condemnations and calls to boycott and protest his rallies and not to vote for him?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6K9dS9wl7U

The person most damaged by this episode is not the Chick-Fil-A guy, but Rahm Emanuel (Chicago Mayor, a key member of Obama's 2008 campaign and White House Chief of Staff until 2010) who arrogantly proclaimed that Chic-Fil-A does not hold "Chicago Values" and was not welcome in the city.

RaRaRasputin

What is the big problem? You can boycott a place any time for any reason you please and this one might seem ridiculous to you but maybe not to others.
Since I believe that the Bible is nothing but a collection of fairy tales I think it's amazing that so many people actually still insist on trying to live their lives in accordance to this nonsense. But anyway, everyone's allowed to believe whatever they want, but you cannot control the way others will react to it.

Had he said that he was against equality of different religious groups because the Bible taught him that Christians are superiour there would have been a major outcry and no one here would have any issue with it.

It's about time gay people get the same rights as straight ones, since they have the same duties.

im invisible

Eat mor chiks,
.
.
.
that is all

How is this news? Am I missing something?

Who cares what some business man thinks.. He's entitled to hold his own opinions.

jaydoxx

According to Equality Matters, Chick-Fil-A donated almost $2 million to anti-gay organizations in 2010, including over $1,100,000 to the Marriage & Family Foundation, an organization that Chick-Fil-A Vice President Donald “Bubba” Cathy actually founded.

Say what you want about being entitled to an opinion, but standing in the way of anyone's rights is very much worthy of protest.

OU812

On the bottom of their receipts where it normally says "Thank you for your custom", says "Jesus Loves You", just not if you're gay apparently.

Great chicken. Lousy standards though.

jaydoxx

jaydoxx wrote: »

Say what you want about being entitled to an opinion, but standing in the way of anyone's rights is very much worthy of protest.

yeah nobody cares about his stance, it's the hate group donations which are a problem

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

How is this news? Am I missing something?

Who cares what some business man thinks.. He's entitled to hold his own opinions.

According to Equality Matters, Chick-Fil-A donated almost $2 million to anti-gay organizations in 2010, including over $1,100,000 to the Marriage & Family Foundation, an organization that Chick-Fil-A Vice President Donald “Bubba” Cathy actually founded.

I was missing something.

King of Kings

jaydoxx wrote: »

Say what you want about being entitled to an opinion, but standing in the way of anyone's rights is very much worthy of protest.

so what you are saying really is that one can have an opinion just make sure it's the "right" one.

He is fully entitled to his opinion

bluewolf wrote: »

yeah nobody cares about his stance, it's the hate group donations which are a problem

not really, once the group is a legal lobby group is he not entitled to support who he believes in , like you are?

Ambp

Davidth88

I would ban them ( the fast food chain ) for their disservice to the English language .

jaydoxx

King of Kings wrote: »

so what you are saying really is that one can have an opinion just make sure it's the "right" one.

He is fully entitled to his opinion

I never questioned anybody's right to an opinion. He is rightfully allowed to express his opinion as are all the protesters.

If you have a problem with people standing up for equal rights, then feel free to exercise your own right to protest. But don't dare claim that you are being victimised when you're standing in the way of my rights.


@Davidth88: Technically speaking it'd be the french language that's been butchered :P

jank

Welcome to the modern age disease of political correctness. The veil of liberalism and equality is sometimes and more often used as a muzzle to clamp down on anyone with a different opinion than the mainstream conscious. In fact people who speak up about liberalism in this case arent talking about freedom of choice, they are talking about shutting up someone else whos opinion they dont agree with.

He is entitled to his opinion like everyone else, he is also entitled to donate his own money or the company’s money (assuming he owns it) to whomever he pleases. Free country and all that.

King of Kings

King of Kings wrote: »

not really, once the group is a legal lobby group is he not entitled to support who he believes in , like you are?

they're officially designated hate groups, i think that is pushing it
he is entitled to support them and the rest of us are entitled to have a problem with him

Heroditas

Chick-fil-A is awesome!

It's an interesting company - they don't open on Sundays or at Christmas.
They've also poured a lot of money in education programmes - ensuring their staff get a decent education and funding a lot of staff to receive university education.
There is a fairly heavy religious influence on the company though.

Still ..... the food is great!!!!

Jester252

If your right your wrong

DrumSteve

Not as good a product as los pollos hermanos... the chicken there is addictive.

stovelid

You just know it's not going to be hot lesbians staging the kiss-in, don't you. ]

What an illiterate name for a shop, by the way. It's like a parody of a fast-food chain name in a comic or cartoon.

Overthrow

jank wrote: »

Welcome to the modern age disease of political correctness. The veil of liberalism and equality is sometimes and more often used as a muzzle to clamp down on anyone with a different opinion than the mainstream conscious. In fact people who speak up about liberalism in this case arent talking about freedom of choice, they are talking about shutting up someone else whos opinion they dont agree with.

He is entitled to his opinion like everyone else, he is also entitled to donate his own money or the company’s money (assuming he owns it) to whomever he pleases. Free country and all that.

I could take it one step further and say that you're denouncing the denouncers validity of denouncing.

There's a reason it's becoming the mainstream consciousness, that's how change actually happens in the real world.

Those with old fashioned views will eventually be sidelined and the usual cries of hypocrisy will be aired. By yours (and probably his) perception, anyone who has a liberal view and complains about a conservative view is just trying to impose political correctness and outright disregard anyone who holds a differing view. Well, at some point beliefs require action in order to spread, and the opposition of conservatism is one of those actions.

I'm not saying that all protestors are pure in their convictions, but it's very easy to say they're hypocrites just because they're outspoken in their disagreement against someone who is outspoken in their disagreement.

jaydoxx

jank wrote: »

Welcome to the modern age disease of political correctness. The veil of liberalism and equality is sometimes and more often used as a muzzle to clamp down on anyone with a different opinion than the mainstream conscious. In fact people who speak up about liberalism in this case arent talking about freedom of choice, they are talking about shutting up someone else whos opinion they dont agree with.

He is entitled to his opinion like everyone else, he is also entitled to donate his own money or the company’s money (assuming he owns it) to whomever he pleases. Free country and all that.

Surely you're not implying that the protesters are wrong?:eek:

jank

bluewolf wrote: »

they're officially designated hate groups, i think that is pushing it
he is entitled to support them and the rest of us are entitled to have a problem with him

Officially by whom?

seamus

scudzilla wrote: »

What is the world coming to? Are we not allowed to hold an opinion anymore without being jumped on by some sort of Human Rights group demanding equailty?

You have a right to hold any opinion.

You don't have a right to express that opinion in public and be protected from criticism.

This is something that a lot of people miss. "That's just how I feel" doesn't mean that you should be left alone. If you can't defend your opinion, don't express it.

jank

jaydoxx wrote: »

Surely you're not implying that the protesters are wrong?:eek:

I am not implying anything but it seems a bit like a good ol fashioned witch hunt to me.

"What he has a different opinion than me?? Lets protest!!!"

jank

Overthrow wrote: »

I could take it one step further and say that you're denouncing the denouncers validity of denouncing.

There's a reason it's becoming the mainstream consciousness, that's how change actually happens in the real world.

Those with old fashioned views will eventually be sidelined and the usual cries of hypocrisy will be aired. By yours (and probably his) perception, anyone who has a liberal view and complains about a conservative view is just trying to impose political correctness and outright disregard anyone who holds a differing view. Well, at some point beliefs require action in order to spread, and the opposition of conservatism is one of those actions.

I'm not saying that all protestors are pure in their convictions, but it's very easy to say they're hypocrites just because they're outspoken in their disagreement against someone who is outspoken in their disagreement.

Yes and by that extension then we are afraid to voice our true opinions for the fear of being ridiculed or set upon by a rent a mob. People with Liberal views should be grown up and liberal enough to understand that not everyone is going to agree with their position, isnt that after all what liberalism is, a tollerance of other peoples backgrounds, culture and opinions what ever they may be.

This isnt about conservative vs liberals. Its about tolerance. The man has an opinion yet he is tollerant enough to serve people who may be in a same sex marriage. The people who aren't tollerant here are those advocating boycoats and "protests". Do we have to reduce humanity and induviduals down to lemmings that must blindly follow whatever is deemed acceptable?

You cant have it both ways but many people seem to try.

Corkfeen

jank wrote: »

bluewolf wrote: »

they're officially designated hate groups, i think that is pushing it
he is entitled to support them and the rest of us are entitled to have a problem with him

Officially by whom?

One example : http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Family_Association#Labeled_a_hate_group
They are entitled to have their opinion just like the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church, just expect for people to boycott and object to their opinions at the same time.

scudzilla wrote: »

Andy Carroll wrote: »

This.
That is all.

But the Fast Food chain DOESN'T have a stance, the head guy just said he doesn't agree with it!!

The fast food chain does in fact hold this stance.

Wacker The Attacker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iyez_SqATCY

Corkfeen

Corkfeen wrote: »

One example : http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Family_Association#Labeled_a_hate_group
They are entitled to have their opinion just like the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church, just expect for people to boycott and object to their opinions at the same time.


The fast food chain does in fact hold this stance.

and their association with the uganda "kill the gays" bill & spreading lies

http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.ie/2011/03/afa-teams-up-with-ugandan-anti-gay-bill.html

Funglegunk

It's not just his opinion, he is also donating millions of dollars to a group who are lobbying against gay rights. Some people have a problem with that and are saying so. Some people don't.

Attabear

jank wrote: »

"What he has a different opinion than me?? Lets protest!!!"

But, isn't that a good thing? Aren't people allowed publicly disagree with his opinion? Since he expressed it publicly.

jaydoxx

jank wrote: »

I am not implying anything but it seems a bit like a good ol fashioned witch hunt to me.

"What he has a different opinion than me?? Lets protest!!!"

A mass public display of affection. Hardly comparable to a witch hunt is it?:D
Making consumers more aware of what their money funds can only be a good thing.

jank

Corkfeen wrote: »

One example : http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Family_Association#Labeled_a_hate_group
They are entitled to have their opinion just like the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church, just expect for people to boycott and object to their opinions at the same time.


The fast food chain does in fact hold this stance.

So they are not "officaly" a hate group then. Glad you cleared it up.

What stance are you on about? That they dont serve Gay couples?

Ellis Dee

Well, who'd have ever thought it!:rolleyes::rolleyes:

An American right-wing religious fundamentalist homophobe in a position of power wants to force his views on everyone else.:):)

What next?

jank

bluewolf wrote: »

and their association with the uganda "kill the gays" bill & spreading lies

http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.ie/2011/03/afa-teams-up-with-ugandan-anti-gay-bill.html

By that extension Obama is of the same ilk with his association with Rev. Wright as he was a member of a hate group, guilt by association and all that... down the rabbit hole we go:rolleyes:

jaydoxx

jank wrote: »

This isnt about conservative vs liberals. Its about tolerance. The man has an opinion yet he is tollerant enough to serve people who may be in a same sex marriage. The people who aren't tollerant here are those advocating boycoats and "protests". Do we have to reduce humanity and induviduals down to lemmings that must blindly follow whatever is deemed acceptable?

You cant have it both ways but many people seem to try.

How noble of him to take money from a consumer and then condemn said consumer to a life of inequality because they are gay.

hardCopy

Why is a fast food CEO even being asked about this?

I wonder how the owner of K-Bab K-Lub feels about Seanaid Reform

jank

Attabear wrote: »

But, isn't that a good thing? Aren't people allowed publicly disagree with his opinion? Since he expressed it publicly.

Do you think its OK for elected officals to tell the company that they are not welcome?

Attabear

jank wrote: »

Do you think its OK for elected officals to tell the company that they are not welcome?

Yes, it happens all the time.

How many times have public officials in towns all over Ireland for example objected to various business activities in their town for a myriad of reasons?

Try opening a lapdancing club in Knock!!

jank

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Well, who'd have ever thought it!:rolleyes::rolleyes:

An American right-wing religious fundamentalist homophobe in a position of power wants to force his views on everyone else.:):)

What next?

The only one "forcing" their views on other people are elected officials who are telling a private individual that he is not welcome in setting up a business in a political jurisdiction because he as a private individual holds a differing view which ironically enough is the law of the land!!! (reminds me of the SWP here in Ireland)

They are the ones abusing their position of power. Telling others what to think or should I say the "right" way to think. That my friend is government Fascism. They have no business in this matter and the fact that this hasn't even been coped on by posters here is a real indication of the level of ignorance of the matter.

Man holds an opinion....right to protest, hate groups, KKK, money, power, he is the bad guy!
Elected offical tries ban a legal business entity because of personal opinions....not a peep!!

jaydoxx

jank wrote: »

Do you think its OK for elected officals to tell the company that they are not welcome?

Absolutely not. But I will say that it doesn't even register on the corrupt politician power-abuse scale. I still don't condone their behaviour though.

jank

Attabear wrote: »

Yes, it happens all the time.

How many times have public officials in towns all over Ireland for example objected to various business activities in their town for a myriad of reasons?

Try opening a lapdancing club in Knock!!

So you think its OK that government dictate who can and cannot set up business? OK so, then you are a Fascist.

Guy:Incognito

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Well, who'd have ever thought it!:rolleyes::rolleyes:

An American right-wing religious fundamentalist homophobe in a position of power wants to force his views on everyone else.:):)

What next?

Who's he forcing his views on

jank

I am going to leave you with this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/opinion/let-chick-fil-a-fly-free.html

As a gay man, I’m disheartened by statements like Mr. Cathy’s, with their limited conception of what it means to be a family. “Family” is a treasured — I’ll say it, sacred — word in the gay community. Through decades of modern-day oppression, gay men and lesbians have created families against all odds. Love, loyalty, commitment, mutual support: these things are family. They are scarce virtues that our society should do everything in its power to foster.

But that’s my opinion. And a society that truly believes in individual freedom will respect Mr. Cathy’s right to his views. Those who disagree with him are free to boycott Chick-fil-A in protest. But if our elected officials run Chick-fil-A out of town, they are effectively voting for all of us, regardless of our respective beliefs, and eliminating our individual freedoms.

jaydoxx

jank wrote: »

The only one "forcing" their views on other people are elected officials who are telling a private individual that he is not welcome in setting up a business in a political jurisdiction because he as a private individual holds a differing view which ironically enough is the law of the land!!! (reminds me of the SWP here in Ireland)

They are the ones abusing their position of power. Telling others what to think or should I say the "right" way to think. That my friend is government Fascism. They have no business in this matter and the fact that this hasn't even been coped on by posters here is a real indication of the level of ignorance of the matter.

Man holds an opinion....right to protest, hate groups, KKK, money, power, he is the bad guy!
Elected offical tries ban a legal business entity because of personal opinions....not a peep!!

I think people have ignored this point because in general, people in power tend to be corrupt. And their grossly unprofessional, unconstitutional statements should not detract from the people who choose to exercise their right to protest in the correct way.

But if our elected officials run Chick-fil-A out of town, they are effectively voting for all of us, regardless of our respective beliefs, and eliminating our individual freedoms.

The running theme of this thread suggests that nobody believes this to be the right thing to do.

Attabear wrote: »

I actually said they had a right to express an opinion on it. You asked could they say the company wasn't welcome. I said they could.

Bit reactionary to call that fascism.

The thing is, those mayors spoke for everyone in their respective cities when they said that. You have to see that's wrong. For one person to speak for everyone, sounds like a dictatorship to me:\

Attabear

jank wrote: »

So you think its OK that government dictate who can and cannot set up business? OK so, then you are a Fascist.

I actually said they had a right to express an opinion on it. You asked could they say the company wasn't welcome. I said they could.

Bit reactionary to call that fascism.

Corkfeen

jank wrote: »

So you think its OK that government dictate who can and cannot set up business? OK so, then you are a Fascist.

The word fascism gets thrown around a lot. The American government is in no way close to being fascist. Firstly, i've never heard of a fascist state that were in favour of equal rights for all. :rolleyes: States are perfectly within their rights to tell companies that do fund hate groups to **** off and generally they won't be blocked as a result of the mayors opposition but if there's a large scale protest and boycotting in regards to them on the other hand that is based on public opinion. If public opinion isn't actually opposed to them, I doubt the mayor's stance will have any effect upon their ability to open.

Companies that do fund hate groups (they mightn't be hating enough for you but they still constitute hate) are always to going to result in issues. If a company that funded white supremacists or people who were opposed to inter-racial marriage attempted to base in a city, you'd see opposition once again.

And to be blatantly honest, the ability for same sex couples to marry is a human right that has been prevented for far too long. The groups opposed to it and lobbying against it are generally very nasty, they do constitute hate groups.

Attabear

jaydoxx wrote: »

You have to see that's wrong. For one person to speak for everyone, sounds like a dictatorship to me:\

Elected officials claim to speak for everyone or at least the majority of people all the time. That's not dictatorship.

Politicians in Ireland routinely claim that right and they justify it by saying they have a mandate.

Words like fascism and dictatorship are bandied around much too easily for my liking.

hooradiation

jaydoxx wrote: »

The thing is, those mayors spoke for everyone in their respective cities when they said that. You have to see that's wrong. For one person to speak for everyone, sounds like a dictatorship to me:\

You do fucking know what a representative democracy is, right?
Protip, you live in one

Sea Filly

Deleted User wrote: »

How is this news? Am I missing something?

Who cares what some business man thinks.. He's entitled to hold his own opinions.

I actually totally agree.