This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Magician22773
Fast food chain Chick-Fil-A says its policy is to treat everyone with “honor, dignity and respect” without regard to sexual orientation.
source
"Because of this man's ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A's permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward."
Moreno, meanwhile, said it will take "more than words" to get him to reverse course.
"They'd have to do a complete 180," the alderman said. "They'd have to work with LGBT groups in terms of hiring, and there would have to be a public apology from (Cathy)."
There is, as far as I can find, no issue with discrimination, or a lack of policy. This Alderman is upset because Chick-Fil-A openly professed,
in an interview with a Christian news outlet
, that they support the Biblical definition of marriage. They have, as far as I could find, no record of discrimiation in employment or service to gays. They simply stated their belief to be that of mainstream Christianity, and they are now being denied a permit because of that.
If you cannot see a blatent, severe double standard here, I don't know how it could be made any more clear. If this situation were reversed, the lawsuits and protests would have already been filed.
Moreno stated his position in strong terms, referring to Cathy's "bigoted, homophobic comments"
You can read the entire story
here
, but below is exactly what he said.
Please, tell me what in that statement is "bigoted and homophobic"?
"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.
"We operate as a family business ... our restaurants are typically led by families; some are single. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that," Cathy emphasized.
"We intend to stay the course," he said. "We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."
Post by
Adamsm
So I have to ask, how many here on Wowhead would boycott Chick-Fil-A over this stance?
Post by
Magician22773
So I have to ask, how many here on Wowhead would boycott Chick-Fil-A over this stance?
I would also like to add to this question...and why?
With roughly 50% of Americans having the same beliefs as the President of Chick-Fil-A, one could assume that roughly 50% of all business owners have the same beliefs, they just don't, or won't make them public.
Post by
Adamsm
Er, suppose I should have answered eh?
We don't have that chain here, but if I found out they did hold to the traditional ideal of marriage, I would probably stop going there. Everyone is entitled to their own right for belief, but if I find that to go against what I myself believe in, I wouldn't be comfortable going in there any longer.
Yes, it's more or less the same stance for the Oreo thing I know.
Post by
Magician22773
Before running a chain of Ben Franklin discount franchises with his brother James throughout Arkansas, Missouri, and Kansas -- which would eventually give way to the first Walmart in 1962 -- Walton was a leader in his local community of Bentonville, Arkansas, as head of the Rotary Club and chamber of commerce. He became a member of the city council and launched a Little League program.
And as a man of faith, he taught Sunday school at the local Presbyterian church
.
May want to stay clear of Wal-Mart as well. It would appear that Sam Walton may have been a Christian too.
And
Wendy's
. It seems Dave Thomas was a "Born-Again Christian"
Post by
MyTie
So I have to ask, how many here on Wowhead would boycott Chick-Fil-A over this stance?
I would also like to add to this question...and why?
With roughly 50% of Americans having the same beliefs as the President of Chick-Fil-A, one could assume that roughly 50% of all business owners have the same beliefs, they just don't, or won't make them public.
Hehe.... Well said Magician. I remember people who complained about the Oreo cookie on facebook getting mocked because facebook has taken a pro gay stance as well. This doesn't seem like a reason to stop eating oreos if you are against gays, or stop eating chicken sandwiches if you are against gays. The context of the discontent is a little overdone, IMO.
Post by
Magician22773
So I have to ask, how many here on Wowhead would boycott Chick-Fil-A over this stance?
I would also like to add to this question...and why?
With roughly 50% of Americans having the same beliefs as the President of Chick-Fil-A, one could assume that roughly 50% of all business owners have the same beliefs, they just don't, or won't make them public.
Hehe.... Well said Magician. I remember people who complained about the Oreo cookie on facebook getting mocked because facebook has taken a pro gay stance as well. This doesn't seem like a reason to stop eating oreos if you are against gays, or stop eating chicken sandwiches if you are against gays. The context of the discontent is a little overdone, IMO.
Yep, I pounded down a stack of Oreo's just last night.
If this guy had come out and said " Chick-Fil-A does not support gay rights, and as a company, we will not cater to their sinful lifestyle"....or anything along those lines, I would be right at the top of the page letting them know how wrong their opinion was, but he didn't.
In fact, if you read the quote, he does not say they are
against
anything, he says what they are
for
. If there is any jab at all in that qoute, it is the "first wives" line, but I don't see groups of divorced adults boycotting their stores. This is scapegoating at its finest, if you ask me.
Post by
MyTie
Yep, I pounded down a stack of Oreo's just last night.
If this guy had come out and said " Chick-Fil-A does not support gay rights, and as a company, we will not cater to their sinful lifestyle"....or anything along those lines, I would be right at the top of the page letting them know how wrong their opinion was, but he didn't.
In fact, if you read the quote, he does not say they are
against
anything, he says what they are
for
. If there is any jab at all in that qoute, it is the "first wives" line, but I don't see groups of divorced adults boycotting their stores. This is scapegoating at its finest, if you ask me.
Now comes the next part in the argument where someone points out that Christians aren't victims. They'll point out that Christians are this vast majority and that homosexuals are the victims. All of this pitting group against group will be a distraction from the point, that government is overreaching its boundaries.
Post by
Adamsm
The Alderman himself over stepped the boundaries; but more then likely it will be over turned fairly quickly, and they'll be able to open up the new chain location.
Post by
MyTie
The Alderman himself over stepped the boundaries
What boundaries are those?
Post by
Adamsm
The Alderman himself over stepped the boundaries
What boundaries are those?
The ones where he said this:
"Because of this man's ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A's permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward."
Moreno, meanwhile, said it will take "more than words" to get him to reverse course.
"They'd have to do a complete 180," the alderman said. "They'd have to work with LGBT groups in terms of hiring, and there would have to be a public apology from (Cathy)."
That's over stepping the boundaries; though things like that needed approval from more then just the Alderman.
Though,
source
This portion here of the link above raises a few questions as well: hilahcooking via YouTube Fast food chain Chick-Fil-A says its policy is to treat everyone with “honor, dignity and respect” without regard to sexual orientation.
The post did not address whether the company would stop donating to anti-gay groups. In 2010, these donations totaled $2 million.Guess that 'honour, dignity and respect' only goes as far as the doors, and doesn't reach out to the rest of the community unless they are straight and fine the Lord.
Edit: So yes, I would be one of those boycotting the business.
Post by
Magician22773
The "anti-gay" group that they support is the horrible organization, Focus on the Family.
Some of the more disgusting things that this group does are:
The primary ministry of Focus on the Family is to strengthen what it considers to be traditional marriages and families. The underlying philosophy is an evangelical view of Biblical teachings on marriage and family. This is also seen in the published works of Dr. James Dobson, who has written a number of books on subjects ranging from raising children to taking steps to prevent divorce by helping couples with conflict management. One key theme of this ministry is helping couples understand the negative consequences of divorce on their children. The organization maintains a toll-free telephone counseling service available to anyone in a family crisis.
Man...Biblical teachings? Preventing divorce!
These people must be stopped
!
Focus on the Family's Wait No More ministry works with adoption agencies, church leaders and ministry partners to recruit families to adopt children from foster care. The program co-sponsors several adoption conferences throughout the country each year. Since November 2008, more than 1,700 families have started the adoption process through Wait No More.
Adoption services! No doubt a conspiriacy to indoctrinate unsuspecting children into a home filled with crazy religious ideals.
Yes, FotF is an advocate for traditional, Biblical marriage. This does not make them "anti-gay".
Westboro is "anti-gay". The bastards that attacked the woman and carved slurs into her skin are "anti-gay".
Believeing in, and standing up for, principles that are part of your religious beliefs does not make you "anti" anything. It means you are standing "for" something.
Post by
yukonjack
So I have to ask, how many here on Wowhead would boycott Chick-Fil-A over this stance?
I would also like to add to this question...and why?
With roughly 50% of Americans having the same beliefs as the President of Chick-Fil-A, one could assume that roughly 50% of all business owners have the same beliefs, they just don't, or won't make them public.
50% really? Where did you get that number from? I find it hard to believe that many Americans are so myopic.
Post by
Magician22773
50% really? Where did you get that number from? I find it hard to believe that many Americans are so myopic
This poll
shows 53% opposed, 44% for gay marriage.
I have saw others that show a slight majority for it as well, but I am not here to be a Google-bot for you. But it is safe to say that "roughly" 50% of Americans are against gay marriage.
Post by
yukonjack
50% really? Where did you get that number from? I find it hard to believe that many Americans are so myopic
This poll
shows 53% opposed, 44% for gay marriage.
I have saw others that show a slight majority for it as well, but I am not here to be a Google-bot for you. But it is safe to say that "roughly" 50% of Americans are against gay marriage.
Survey Methods
Results are based on telephone interviews conducted May 3-6, 2010, with a random sample of 1,029 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the continental U.S., selected using a random-digit-dial sampling technique.
So 1029 people that actually still have land lines and happened to be home the day this survey was performed (which speaks a lot for the demographic they reached) are now speaking for a country of over 300 million?
Ah well if thats how it is then thas how it is.
Post by
Magician22773
So 1029 people that actually still have land lines and happened to be home the day this survey was performed (which speaks a lot for the demographic they reached) are now speaking for a country of over 300 million?
We actually agree on this point. I have never understood how a poll can take 1000 or so random people, and extrapolate that to 300 million.
But, if you do some research of your own, you will see that there have been several polls, and they all fall in the "roughly" 50/50 split. Common sense is also helpful as well. If there were a large majority of people for it, it would likely be legal. Politicians are pretty smart about what will get them elected, so if a large majority supported it, you would have a majority or politicians supporting it as well. Also, just look at the states that have put it to a vote. Only 11 states have legalized it, and (if i recall correctly), these have all be legalized by legislation. Every state that has voted on it has struck it down.
Post by
FatalHeaven
How about the citizens of the United States whine some more, make a petition and demand that a question along the lines of:
Do you support same-sex marriage?
A. Yes.
B. No.
C. I have no opinion.
Be added to the next Census. Maybe that will stop the bickering. :)
I mean a census will never be 100% accurate but it'd be a heck of a lot more accurate than some second rate survey done via landline of 1000 people.
As far as what I think the percentage is, I think Magician probably is close to the mark. Think about it. Laws that get passed usually go in favor of the majority. How many States allow gay marriage? Not many. If the majority of citizens were
for
same sex marriage, it's very likely I'd be married right now. Do I like it? No. Do I think its fair thats people "beliefs" won't allow me to marry someone I've dedicated my life to love and support, to raise children with etc... No I sure don't. But it is what it is.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
gamerunknown
I have never understood how a poll can take 1000 or so random people, and extrapolate that to 300 million.
Think it's to do with statistical samplings.
Anyway, I agree it's entirely the wrong way to go about things. The US is essentially a capitalist system: individuals meet in the marketplace in order to exchange goods and land. Public officials should not presume to speak for the majority of people in preventing others from doing this, unless such an exchange is illegal. If it were up to me, I hope I'd have the foresight to quote the positions of Chick-Fil-A in context, attempt to make my constituents aware of their positions and the way their profits are expended, but ultimately leave it up to the consumers as to whether they want to give their patronage to the organisation.
Edit: If the majority of people decided the land would better be used for another function, such as a library, a garden or some other food joint, I wouldn't have a problem with that though.
Post by
MyTie
Edit: If the majority of people decided the land would better be used for another function, such as a library, a garden or some other food joint, I wouldn't have a problem with that though.
I'd agree with you, if it were on public land. But, if a place of business only has 3% of the population's support, and the ohter 97% is adamantly against it, that doesn't mean it should be uprooted by the government. If that business can survive on 3% of the population as its income, then let it survive, as long as it isn't doing anything illegal. Business isn't a popularity contest.
This "ChicFilA" incident is, I think, a great example of Christian ideals being targeted and attacked. It's a snapshot of a greater problem, which involves an attempt to silence dissenting opinions from the popular view.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.