Chicago politician blocks Chick-fil-a from opening

Yes it seems Chicago is doing so well economically, they should be turning away businesses for the sake of gay marriage opinions.

/sarc

 

Has everyone gone completely CRAZY? We're talking about a fast-food place that serves chicken sandwiches, soup, salad, cole slaw, and cookies! If the owner of the business doesn't like gay "marriage" then the gays can boycott his restaurants and go eat somewhere else, or each other, or whatever. But exactly WHAT has some ******** Libocrat politician in Chicago got to do with whether or not somebody can start up a restaurant or not? I'm starting to wish that there would be a huge earthquake under Chicago that would plunge the whole gigantic pile of hyperlib crap into Lake Michigan....

 

So if your son or daughter was gay you would not mind people calling them homo?

 

I totally support gay marriage and free speech. Does this really need explanation? As long as Chick-fil is not discriminating gay customers or workers, the ceo is free to express his or her opinion. That's free speech! This is a problem I have with some liberal democrats as well. It's their way or no way! You MUST agree 100%

 

Well said.

 

Since when is freedom of speech against the law? I hope others that feels he has the right to speak his mind, makes a point to eat at his restaurants. I'm a little sick of government telling us what we can eat, drink and say. Liberals would take all your freedom away if it goes against their beliefs.

 

Would you want a KKK restaurant in your neighborhood?

 

1. I wouldn't care, personally. I'm sure I have racists of all kinds around me because people live in my neighborhood.
2. They're not quite the KKK. They hire anyone of any race, gender, or orientation and serve all people.

I used to not eat there because of their policies, but when I hear "death to all Chikfila eaters" and politicians taking our rights to boycott away from us --for our own good--by denying them a permit...I'm done.

People have to learn to engage in civil protests and respectfully engage each other...like, not calling people "homos" on PF, for example.

 

So what do Liberal-tarians think of this story? Should a business be discriminated against in this way because the owner expresses a personal opinion on an issue?

 

Cheap shot. I have the greatest admiration and respect for Sally Ride and I am pretty darn liberal too. But I will always stand up for free speech, why won't you? Time to trade in your broad brush yet?

 

This is communism.

 

Inconsistent and expedient positions.

 

The owner has the right to say what he wants and the government has the right to say no to a business license.

PS: Its not a cheap shot...Its hypocrisy from the right.

 

Assuming they say no for a legal reason such as zoning laws, not because they simply do not like what the ceo said, not simply because it goes against their own political beliefs. That's abuse of power and tyranny.

 

See my take on it, metal head.

 

You do not have the right to own and operate a business under the constitution period.

 

You're a libertarian, not a liberaltarian. There's a difference.

 

Its showing the hypocrisy of the right.



Not one conservative gives a (*)(*)(*)(*) about Sally Ride's partner who cannot receive federal benefits, even thou they were together for 27 years.

The owner of Chick Fil A has been on record saying that he does not support gay marriage and his company has given money to groups who oppose gay marriage.

A Chicago alderman comes and says no, we don’t care for your bigotry so you cannot have a store here. The conservatives go nuts.

If the conservatives cared about rights, they would care about Sally Ride's partner of 27 years not receiving her benefits. They do not.

I’m showing their hypocrisy and the hypocrisy of this thread.

 

I understand the conservative hypocrisy ok and agree with you on that. I just hope people don't assume that as left leaning individuals we will easily abandon our support for free speech.

I think it's a shame and a crime this union of 27 years is not legally recognized.

 

I suggest to all same-sex couples and heterosexual couples to get your legal affairs in order and well-stipulated. Even married couples have issues related to property and estate, so look into living wills with end of life decisions, revocable trusts, etc. The tax man cometh for all.

 

You will never hear me say, that someone does not have the right to say what they want. I’m all for the constitution.

But as a business owner, if you want to promote hate, you certainly have the right to do so, but you should know there will be consequences.

 

They are two separate issues and you can care about both. CFA didn't create DOMA or DADT, nor do they discriminate in hiring or service. They sent a very minute portion of their charitable contributions to organizations that mostly support heterosexual marriage with one exception that got $1000.

The alderman was wrong to deny them a permit for contributions made. He would not have been wrong had they discriminated in employment or service. This sets the precedence that government officials can block your free access to trade if they don't like what you do with your money or your political views.

How you cannot see that as a libertarian I don't know.

The gay federal marriage debate, to me, is quite clear. DOMA was unconstitutional. It was a direct violation of the IV article.

 

That guy should be removed from Government. I hope Chick-fil-a sues his ass off.

 

The boycott was fine until they started calling for death and using political influence to deny people access to trade based off of their speech. That sends a horrible message. Sure, when politicians overstep in ways that we like we usually let it pass, but wait until the precedence is used against you...

 

Curse you! That's one of the few things I miss about Cali, grrrrrrrr....... No burger is like an In-n-Out burger.... And anyone that doesn't know, hasn't tasted! Curse you again!!! I do miss that!