• 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]

BLASPHEMER!!!! Chik-Fil-A's awesome!

Yep, they make this homo very happy(the only "bad" food I allow myself to eat), and I find that better than to stop eating there all together.
 
The political positions of Chick-Fil-A are what put the stakes of the state in jeopardy. Try and keep up? :)

making a mere declaration doesn't establish something as fact. Sorry, chief
 
I laugh at that phrase to, its propaganda since that word is totally subjective

I think it makes sense. Marriage is traditionally between a man and woman. Hence, traditional marriage. Its just been demonized by the LBGT community and mis-used by rights infringers (if thats a word) in the legislature. Its like the word zealot. Nothing wrong with the word. But the media has made it a bad word by attaching "left wing" or "right wing" to it.
 
where does it state that???????????????????

14th amendment:

Regulation of Business Enterprises - Fourteenth Amendment U.S. Constitution - Findlaw

Nebbia v. New York .--In upholding, by a vote of five-to-four, a depression-induced New York statute fixing prices at which fluid milk might be sold, the Court in 1934 finally shelved the concept of ''a business affected with a public interest.''149 Older decisions, insofar as they negatived a power to control prices in businesses found not ''to be clothed with a public use'' were now viewed as resting, ''finally, upon the basis that the requirements of due process were not met because the laws were found arbitrary in their operation and effect.


Development .--In Munn v. Illinois, 153 its initial holding concerning the applicability of the Fourteenth Amendment to governmental price fixing, 154 the Court not only asserted that governmental regulation of rates charged by public utilities and allied businesses was within the States' police power, but added that the determination of such rates by a legislature was conclusive and not subject to judicial review or revision. Expanding the range of per missible governmental fixing of prices, the Court in Nebbia 155 declared that prices established for business in general would invite judicial condemnation only if ''arbitrary, discriminatory, or demonstrably irrelevant to the policy the legislature is free to adopt.''

The 14th amendment gives the state the right to regulate businesses when the state's interests are in jeopardy.
 
Yep, they make this homo very happy(the only "bad" food I allow myself to eat), and I find that better than to stop eating there all together.

This homo lol. I love your lack of political correctness when speaking of your homosexuality. Its a breath of fresh air. For what its worth, I still shop at Target, eat Oreos, and go to Disney World when I can.
 
making a mere declaration doesn't establish something as fact. Sorry, chief

Making the false argument that Chik-Fil-A's chicken frying is what is being debated here makes you look dishonest. That is a fact.
 
14th amendment:

Regulation of Business Enterprises - Fourteenth Amendment U.S. Constitution - Findlaw






The 14th amendment gives the state the right to regulate businesses when the state's interests are in jeopardy.

again, how would the states interest be in jepordy from the selling of chicken, or the political views espoused by these selling the chicken, and please cite any case supported by these ruling that attempts to limit a private individuals commercial activity, based on their political views.
 
This homo lol. I love your lack of political correctness when speaking of your homosexuality. Its a breath of fresh air. For what its worth, I still shop at Target, eat Oreos, and go to Disney World when I can.

I'm watching a disney dvd as we speak
 
So you want blacks in Chicago to be unemployed.

Yo, don't you have a black lesbian abortion provider you can go stalk or something? You're annoying me with your nonsequiturs.
 
again, how would the states interest be in jepordy from the selling of chicken, or the political views espoused by these selling the chicken, and please cite any case supported by these ruling that attempts to limit a private individuals commercial activity, based on their political views.

Still creating straw man arguments? Kk.
 
Making the false argument that Chik-Fil-A's chicken frying is what is being debated here makes you look dishonest. That is a fact.

the store isn't being set up to disseminate ideology (and even if it was, such would still be protected exercise of the first), it's being set up to sell chicken. But keep up the attacks as you attempt to limit peoples civil rights, like the very mongrels you claim to detest
 
and you claim to HATE those who refuse to acknowledge their hypocrisy... :lamo

I haven't changed any topic. The topic is on the chicken restaurant. It's a business that supports hate groups. Where did you get lost?
 
that made me laugh.

you compared price fixing and destroying communities with denying people for disagreeing with political views.

once again you failed,try again fascist.

You still don't see where your argument is wrong? You asked where the state has a right to defend its interests. I showed you where. You can run along and try and change the constitution if you don't like it.
 
Still creating straw man arguments? Kk.

still unable to justify your views and address relevant criticism? Again, explain how denying a business proper licensing, based on their political views, doesn't amount to the state infringing on their right to the free exercise of political speech
 
still unable to justify your views and address relevant criticism? Again, explain how denying a business proper licensing, based on their political views, doesn't amount to the state infringing on their right to the free exercise of political speech

You don't get it yet do you? It has nothing to do with frying chicken. That you're still making it about that is silly. I can't help you if you can't really see that this has nothing to do about the fat in their fries.
 
You still don't see where your argument is wrong? You asked where the state has a right to defend its interests. I showed you where. You can run along and try and change the constitution if you don't like it.

as long as those interests are in line with a group you agree with? right buddy? ;)
 
as long as those interests are in line with a group you agree with? right buddy? ;)

As long as those interests don't forbid others from sharing the same life right friend? ;)
 
You still don't see where your argument is wrong? You asked where the state has a right to defend its interests. I showed you where. You can run along and try and change the constitution if you don't like it.

In Brandenburg vs Ohio the court upheld the right of an individual to preach about, and promote, armed insurrection against the state, but you think the courts would allow the state to infringe on those very same right, due to anti-gay sentiment?
 
as long as those interests are in line with a group you agree with? right buddy? ;)

Oscar, you're being a homophobic grouch. That's not nice. Not nice at all.
 
You still don't see where your argument is wrong? You asked where the state has a right to defend its interests. I showed you where. You can run along and try and change the constitution if you don't like it.

defending political views and denying others is not defending a states interests,it has nothing to do with economic conditions,it has to do with political favoritism,therefore i guarantee any harvard lawyer would laugh in your face on this one.


under those same rules if they went by your book,any state could deny any black/catholic/asian business in the greater needs of the state.

show me where chick fila would harm the states interests outside political,and choosing on political reasons is once again one of the foundations of fascism,and also the cornerstone to dictatorship.
 
Let's see...did he advocate for hunting down the gay menace? Why no! In fact he has stated that his faith in God directs that he be opposed to gay marriage. That's....that's...well...actually up until 2 months ago the exact same opinion the president held. And shockingly not too far out of line with a significant number of democrats still.
 
You don't get it yet do you? It has nothing to do with frying chicken. That you're still making it about that is silly. I can't help you if you can't really see that this has nothing to do about the fat in their fries.

Nothing in that post mentions selling chicken, champ...
 
Back
Top Bottom