• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

`but is it illegal for them to do so?

if john q public wants to boycott chik-fil-a because they disagree with who they support with their money that is fine. but for the govt to deny them a license to run a legal business because of it is another thing.

until the govt passes a law that makes it illegal to support anti-gay organizations, it should not be allowed to deny them based on such support.

Of course it isnt illegal for them to voice their opinion. Nor do I think Chicago should stop CFA from opening more restaurants.
 
so should the govt, therefore, be allowed to deny business licenses to christian bookstores?

The government can deny business licenses to anyone it wants. A business license is not a guaranteed right.
 
The OP and 5 people need to learn what freedom of speech means....

when the govt discriminates against someone based soley on said speech, it is an infringement upon free speech.

if this is not an infringement on free speech....then how can voter ID laws be an infringement on the right to vote?

if people want to boycott, that's fine, but the govt shouldn't be able to punish you for legal speech...no matter how stupid it is.
 
The government can deny business licenses to anyone it wants. A business license is not a guaranteed right.

So are you ok with some hick town denying a business license to black people based on race? Or what about a tiny country town that won't give a business license to atheists?
 
The government can deny business licenses to anyone it wants. A business license is not a guaranteed right.

so you wouldn't have a problem with the govt denying business licenses to all black business owners? afterall...a business licenses isn't a guaranteed right
 
So are you ok with some hick town denying a business license to black people based on race? Or what about a tiny country town that won't give a business license to atheists?

welll......that's different.... :roll:
 
under the 14 amendment

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

last part of section one.

since corporations are viewed under the legal system as people,that makes actions completely illegal.

also to note choosing and denying business by reason of political support,is seen as one of the corner stones of fascism.

"State intervention in economic production may take place only where private initiative is lacking or is insufficient, or when are at stakes the political interest of the State.

right from the fascist playbook,it sickens me democrats demonize fascism yet follow its principles when it fits an agenda.it sickens me even more when they cry for equality,unless someone doesnt fit their agenda,then they suddenly feel equal rights shouldnt apply equally,but only to those who support their agenda.
 
The government can deny business licenses to anyone it wants. A business license is not a guaranteed right.

It seems that if someone was denied a business licence due to their political views it would be a clear effort by the state to punish unpopular speech. How that wouldn't be a first amendment violation is beyond me
 
The OP and 5 people need to learn what freedom of speech means....

can you explain it to me, because it seems to be going over my head
 
I spent a month in Ft Walton Beach FL on business earlier this year and I ate me some chik-fil-a almost every day. would have been every day but they close on Sundays. I could care ****all about their politics. they make the best chicken sandwich in the business. and as long as they are willing to serve or hire anybody.... :shrug:

You have every right to that...
Yea sure their food is good. But i dont like where my money goes to after i hand it over to the register... So therefor i boycott.
 
I'm going to stick my neck out here but I suppose MY opinion won't harm anything.

First let me say that 4 of my closest, most beloved friends are a SSM and SSM couple. The guys have a real live marriage license. I have been periperally involved in gay rights causes since I was a young teen. I strongly believe is SSM and hope to see this injustice vanished while I am still alive.

That being said, I also strongly believe that a business license is and must be a right as long as zoning and product are appropriate. This type of action is arbitrary and could just as easily be wielded against me when I open Speck-le-Banga Spicy Chicken because I believe all politicians are crooked or our wars are foolish and unjust. I do believe these things and would support a group that held those positions. I still am entitled to a business license.

Now, you have every right to boycott me for my misanthropic ways. I'm just a mean old man. Don't spend a dime in my place and tweet your stupid friends about me. But you have to give me my damn license or do you say, only give them to your buddies who paid you off. Eh?



The government can deny business licenses to anyone it wants. A business license is not a guaranteed right.
 
Thanks for imposing the false charge that I believe that gays are a bunch of child molesters. Do I agree with FRC studies? No. But rationally, are they a hate group on par with the KKK or NeoNazis? No. You immediately jump in to attack a group and equate them with violent groups like the KKK without knowings its history. When FRC starts hanging homosexuals or killing them in ethnic purges then you'll have an equatable argument. But regardless, the issue is not about the FRC or if Chick Fil A donates to your perceived "hate groups." It's about city governments trying to legally harm a business based on the owner's personal views. This is a violation of freedom.

I love how you continue to call a claim that gays are child molesters "research". You just can't get enough of defending these guys, can ya? You do realize they want to criminalize homosexuality, right? They want to put me behind bars for being in a same sex relationship. That isn't violent? How are they going to get me behind bars? Are they going to wave a carrot and hope I hop right into my cage?

Dude, you sicken me. You sit here accusing people of not checking their bias when you leap to the defense of a hate group because you agree with their fundamental position that homosexuality is bad. Good for ya. You got your silly interpretations and beliefs. But don't make yourself into a hypocrite. That just doesn't look good on you.

Oh, and here is some more "research" from your buddies.

Gay men are more likely to be pedophiles
http://mediamatters.org/research/2006/10/04/perkins-claimed-that-homosexual-men-are-more-li/136830

Gay activists are terrorists who “work out of the same playbook” as Islamists
http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201104290008

Gays and lesbians want to “destroy your traditional values”
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conte...n-society-and-destroy-your-traditional-values

Gays and lesbians want to “recruit” children into a “lifestyle” of “perversion”
http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201108190009

Gays promote an agenda that’s “destructive to our society” and could be the “death nail” of America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfNVgJ4rwMo&feature=related
http://onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1379614

Because that is what loving groups have to say about other people.
 
Last edited:
I love how you continue to call a claim that gays are child molesters "research". You just can't get enough of defending these guys, can ya? You do realize they want to criminalize homosexuality, right? They want to put me behind bars for being in a same sex relationship. That isn't violent? How are they going to get me behind bars? Are they going to wave a carrot and hope I hop right into my cage?

Dude, you sicken me. You sit here accusing people of not checking their bias when you leap to the defense of a hate group because you agree with their fundamental position that homosexuality is bad. Good for ya. You got your silly interpretations and beliefs. But don't make yourself into a hypocrite. That just doesn't look good on you.

I have said it about twice now. I disagree with the FRC's conclusions and have said that their research is biased, and me calling it research doesn't mean that I somehow claim that gays are child molesters. I'm not defending the views of the FRC, I'm just saying that they aren't a hate group comparable with NeoNazis or the KKK.

I'm sorry that you find me sickening because I don't support your belief that the FRC is a hate group on par with the KKK and NeoNazis. I don't think you're being rational on this issue, and I would encourage you to reflect on the possibility that you may have some bias. But regardless, I'm done. I have better things to do than try and defend myself against false accusations, straw men attacks and illogically derived conclusions about my beliefs.
 
Last edited:
I have said it about twice now. I disagree with the FRC's conclusions and have said that their research is biased, and me calling it research doesn't mean that I somehow claim that gays are child molesters. I'm not defending the views of the FRC, I'm just saying that they aren't a hate group comparable with NeoNazis or the KKK.

The fact that you continue to call their lies and distortion "research" says a lot more about your true beliefs than your doublespeak does. They are a hate group regardless of how much that hurts your feelings. They want to throw me behind bars, and whether or not you are willing to recognize it, they can only do that through violence and coercion. Yeah, they are a more polite hate group than the KKK. They aren't going to hunt me down and burn a cross on my yard. They would prefer to pass laws that would get the government to do their dirty work for them.

I'm sorry that you find me sickening because I don't support your belief that the FRC is a hate group on par with the KKK and NeoNazis. I don't think your being rational on this issue, and I would encourage you to reflect on the possibility that you may have some bias. But regardless, I'm done. I have better things to do than try and defend myself against false accusations, straw men attacks and illogically derived conclusions about my beliefs.

All hypocrites sicken me. Especially when they refuse to acknowledge their hypocrisy.
 
All hypocrites sicken me. Especially when they refuse to acknowledge their hypocrisy.


that's what I find absolutely hilarious. considering that many of the same people in this thread who are denying that this is a violation of chik-fil-a's rights are the same people who squeal that voter ID laws violate the rights of minorities and the poor.


apparently it only violates someone's rights if you agree with that person's or group's opinion :shrug:
 
So are you ok with some hick town denying a business license to black people based on race? Or what about a tiny country town that won't give a business license to atheists?

The government isn't denying all Christians a business license. You want to try your comparison again champ?
 
The government isn't denying all Christians a business license. You want to try your comparison again champ?

but they are denying a christian business,already explained in a prevbious post as violsating the 14th amendment and also a classic fascist move in not allowing business that dont meet a political agenda
 
I have said it about twice now. I disagree with the FRC's conclusions and have said that their research is biased, and me calling it research doesn't mean that I somehow claim that gays are child molesters. I'm not defending the views of the FRC, I'm just saying that they aren't a hate group comparable with NeoNazis or the KKK.

I'm sorry that you find me sickening because I don't support your belief that the FRC is a hate group on par with the KKK and NeoNazis. I don't think you're being rational on this issue, and I would encourage you to reflect on the possibility that you may have some bias. But regardless, I'm done. I have better things to do than try and defend myself against false accusations, straw men attacks and illogically derived conclusions about my beliefs.


THis group is intentionally stirring up hatred against gay people by appealing to the very visceral reaction people have to that which damages children. People who feel this hatred are apt to ac out on it in violent ways, and so yes -- this group is a hate group beyond any doubt.

You are defending them by demanding that in order to be considered as a hate group, they need to be the equal of the kkk or Nazis in terms of actions or scope. The thing is -- that isn't the point. They don't HAVE to be guilty of the heinous actions of the Nazis or the KK to also be considered a hate group.

By setting the bar so artificially high, you legitimize much that IS hateful, and you are doing so much in the same way other people do when it comes to other prejudices they share. I'm reminded of the way people try to portray Jews as scheming, deceitful manipulators, or Blacks as lazy criminals and then try to claim they aren't antisemitic or racist by claiming that the only anti-Semites or racists are those with even more extreme views.

In his case, you are defending an organization that intentionally lies about gay people in order to try to damage them by whipping up the sort of hateful sentiment that so often does turn violent. By demanding that they need to be even MORE extreme in order to be considered a hate group, you legitimize their hatred.
 
"State intervention in economic production may take place only whereprivate initiative is lacking or is insufficient, or when are at stakes the political interest of the State.

The underlined part is the important part. A homophobic establishment puts at stake the political interests of the state. :shrug:
 
The government isn't denying all Christians a business license. You want to try your comparison again champ?

nice dodge. you did say you'd be OK with them denying all christian business owners a license to open a christian bookstore.

so what's the difference.

we can't have christian bookstores but we can have black bookstores?
 
Violence is not the only means of expressing hate. Purposely spreading false, damaging and hateful ideas about group is another means. An organization that spreads false information that homosexual men are more likely be pedophiles is a hate group. I suspect that the majority of people feel some version of hatred when thinking of pedophiles. Consequently, to smear an entire group with that label is certainly an action either aimed at spreading hate or aware of the potential to inspire hatred.

Moreover, FRC and those who do not support SSM are, in fact, spreading the message that heterosexuality is superior to homosexuality, if not directly, then indirectly by attempting to stop it through homosexuality "rehabilitation" techniques. Similarly, they are certainly spreading the message that heterosexual relationships are superior to homosexual relationships when they argue that the latter should be banned or prevented and the former should be embraced.

You are, straight up, blinded by your bias.

You mean like Democrats warning Americans that Republicans wanted to pull the food out of the mouths of little elementary school children during the School Lunch Program debate during the Clinton years?
 
but they are denying a christian business,already explained in a prevbious post as violsating the 14th amendment and also a classic fascist move in not allowing business that dont meet a political agenda

Read post 196.
 
nice dodge. you did say you'd be OK with them denying all christian business owners a license to open a christian bookstore.

Where!?!?! Show us all ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom