• 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!

Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day brings out supporters, protesters [W:529]

Do you really need to be reminded of what you wrote. How you said it's no big deal that Chicago threatened them, it was saber rattling, it wasn't valid threat, blah blah blah? Is this how dishonest you choose to be in your arguments?

Acknowledging it as mere political grandstanding (which it is), is not the same as "excusing government force." Excusing it would be if I said that they were JUSTIFIED in making that statement. But you know perfectly well that I never said that, so instead you have to make dishonest arguments like the disgusting liar you are.
 
I wonder what these bigots would say if I wanted too open a liqour that stays open on sunday? Or a porn shop in a small town....... or a store with a curse word (christian curse word that is ) printed on the door

The KKK would show up quicker than if someone built a mosque in manhattan...........
 
Acknowledging it as mere political grandstanding (which it is), is not the same as "excusing government force." Excusing it would be if I said that they were JUSTIFIED in making that statement. But you know perfectly well that I never said that, so instead you have to make dishonest arguments like the disgusting liar you are.

It is excusing government force as the threat is a force against the free exercise of rights. But you don't want to see it as such because you want the outcome. But if some idiot politician was claiming he didn't like gay people and was going to use his power of eminent domain to take land from homosexuals, even if he didn't do so and it is "political grandstanding", I bet you and some of your folk there would be up in arms. I would be too, but that's only because I'm rational and consistent with my arguments unlike the vast majority of you people.
 
Boston and Chicago threatened to keep Chick-Fil-A out after this. Do you need to be helped out on this, or are you just being dishonest?

(775 ILCS 5/Art. 5 heading)
ARTICLE 5. PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS

(775 ILCS 5/5-101) (from Ch. 68, par. 5-101)
Sec. 5-101. Definitions) The following definitions are applicable strictly in the context of this Article:
(A) Place of Public Accommodation. "Place of public accommodation" includes, but is not limited to:
(1) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging,

except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than 5 units for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;
(2) a restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving

food or drink;
(3) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall,

stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(4) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall,

or other place of public gathering;
(5) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware

store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;
(6) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop,

beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
(7) public conveyances on air, water, or land;
(8) a terminal, depot, or other station used for

specified public transportation;
(9) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of

public display or collection;
(10) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of

recreation;
(11) a non-sectarian nursery, day care center,

elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate school, or other place of education;
(12) a senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food

bank, non-sectarian adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and
(13) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf

course, or other place of exercise or recreation.
(B) Operator. "Operator" means any owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent, or occupant of a place of public accommodation or an employee of any such person or persons.
(C) Public Official. "Public official" means any officer or employee of the state or any agency thereof, including state political subdivisions, municipal corporations, park districts, forest preserve districts, educational institutions and schools.
(Source: P.A. 95-668, eff. 10-10-07; 96-814, eff. 1-1-10.)

(775 ILCS 5/5-102) (from Ch. 68, par. 5-102)
Sec. 5-102. Civil Rights Violations: Public Accommodations. It is a civil rights violation for any person on the basis of unlawful discrimination to:
(A) Enjoyment of Facilities, Goods, and Services. Deny or refuse to another the full and equal enjoyment of the facilities, goods, and services of any public place of accommodation;
(B) Written Communications. Directly or indirectly, as the operator of a place of public accommodation, publish, circulate, display or mail any written communication, except a private communication sent in response to a specific inquiry, which the operator knows is to the effect that any of the facilities of the place of public accommodation will be denied to any person or that any person is unwelcome, objectionable or unacceptable because of unlawful discrimination;
(C) Public Officials. Deny or refuse to another, as a public official, the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantage, facilities or privileges of the official's office or services or of any property under the official's care because of unlawful discrimination.
(Source: P.A. 95-668, eff. 10-10-07.)

(775 ILCS 5/5-102.1)
Sec. 5-102.1. No Civil Rights Violation: Public Accommodations.
(a) It is not a civil rights violation for a medical, dental, or other health care professional or a private professional service provider such as a lawyer, accountant, or insurance agent to refer or refuse to treat or provide services to an individual in a protected class for any non-discriminatory reason if, in the normal course of his or her operations or business, the professional would for the same reason refer or refuse to treat or provide services to an individual who is not in the protected class of the individual who seeks or requires the same or similar treatment or services.
(b) With respect to a place of public accommodation defined in paragraph (11) of Section 5-101, the exercise of free speech, free expression, free exercise of religion or expression of religiously based views by any individual or group of individuals that is protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or under Section 3 of Article I, or Section 4 of Article I, of the Illinois Constitution, shall not be a civil rights violation.
(Source: P.A. 95-668, eff. 10-10-07; 96-814, eff. 1-1-10.)

(775 ILCS 5/5-102.2)
Sec. 5-102.2. Jurisdiction limited. In regard to places of public accommodation defined in paragraph (11) of Section 5-101, the jurisdiction of the Department is limited to: (1) the failure to enroll an individual; (2) the denial of access to facilities, goods, or services; or (3) severe or pervasive harassment of an individual when the covered entity fails to take corrective action to stop the severe or pervasive harassment.
(Source: P.A. 96-814, eff. 1-1-10.)

(775 ILCS 5/5-103) (from Ch. 68, par. 5-103)
Sec. 5-103. Exemption. Nothing in this Article shall apply to:
(A) Private Club. A private club, or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of the establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of another establishment that is a place of public accommodation.
(B) Facilities Distinctly Private. Any facility, as to discrimination based on sex, which is distinctly private in nature such as restrooms, shower rooms, bath houses, health clubs and other similar facilities for which the Department, in its rules and regulations, may grant exemptions based on bona fide considerations of public policy.
(C) Inn, Hotel, Rooming House. Any facility, as to discrimination based on sex, which restricts the rental of rooms to individuals of one sex.
(Source: P.A. 85-567.)

775*ILCS*5/*Illinois Human Rights Act.

Not sure about Boston law, but Illinois seems to have this one covered.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
Let's tone it down a bit and stop with the personal attacks, please.
 
It is excusing government force as the threat is a force against the free exercise of rights. But you don't want to see it as such because you want the outcome.

The outcome is that the mayors recanted, never took any legal action, and then they shut the hell up for a while.

But if some idiot politician was claiming he didn't like gay people and was going to use his power of eminent domain to take land from homosexuals, even if he didn't do so and it is "political grandstanding", I bet you and some of your folk there would be up in arms.

I'd probably be pissed off at him for being such a bigot, but I wouldn't take his threat seriously (especially if he never actually tried to do anything to act on it). And I certainly wouldn't register my opposition to him by buying a chicken sandwich.
 
HAHAH... Awesome, outstanding! If one were near me, I'd go out and eat there everyday.. Ok well not everyday but a lot. :)

Free speech is alive and well. Now maybe the idiots that keep saying that gay marriage is finding wide spread support due to their fake and biased polls even though everywhere it's come up for a vote it was turned down resoundingly will realize that perhaps gay marriage isn't as acceptable as some might delude themselves into thinking. At best gaydom tolerated, but I doubt it will ever be accepted as a normally functioning lifestyle choice.


Tim-
 
The VP of the company had a friggin' heart attack.

The invisible man in the sky has spoken and taken sides on this issue.

I wouldn't be caught dead in a Chick-Fli-A-- no pun intended.

Praise God.

You see that little icon next to the "3"?
 
HAHAH... Awesome, outstanding! If one were near me, I'd go out and eat there everyday.. Ok well not everyday but a lot. :)

Free speech is alive and well. Now maybe the idiots that keep saying that gay marriage is finding wide spread support due to their fake and biased polls even though everywhere it's come up for a vote it was turned down resoundingly will realize that perhaps gay marriage isn't as acceptable as some might delude themselves into thinking. At best gaydom tolerated, but I doubt it will ever be accepted as a normally functioning lifestyle choice.


Tim-

Um...okay. Why would you assume that everyone who shows up to this thing supports Cathy's remarks? You also realize that the issue is evenly split in the polls. That means that half the country could have showed up. And are you really so deluded that you think every polling organization that has polled on this issue is faking it? Even conservative leaning polls have showed strong support for same sex marriage. I think in the excitement you have gone off the wagon, but it is good to see your true colors.
 
Um...okay. Why would you assume that everyone who shows up to this thing supports Cathy's remarks? You also realize that the issue is evenly split in the polls. That means that half the country could have showed up. And are you really so deluded that you think every polling organization that has polled on this issue is faking it? Even conservative leaning polls have showed strong support for same sex marriage. I think in the excitement you have gone off the wagon, but it is good to see your true colors.

Look, you want a reaction more to your liking, call Rahm and tell him to SHUT THE **** UP. Bloomberg has it right, and he's pro-SSM. Got it?
 
Look, you want a reaction more to your liking, call Rahm and tell him to SHUT THE **** UP. Bloomberg has it right, and he's pro-SSM. Got it?

I do not and have never supported Rahm's remarks. This entire thing is utterly hilarious to me. The persecution complex felt by all sides on this debate is remarkable. And has anyone noticed that nobody from the actual gay and lesbian community had any part in this?
 
Meh, go to Sonic or something else. Chik-Fil-A isn't all that great.

You might catch "the gay" at Sonic though. Of course, the risk of that is much higher at Dairy QUEEN.
 
Um...okay. Why would you assume that everyone who shows up to this thing supports Cathy's remarks? You also realize that the issue is evenly split in the polls. That means that half the country could have showed up. And are you really so deluded that you think every polling organization that has polled on this issue is faking it? Even conservative leaning polls have showed strong support for same sex marriage. I think in the excitement you have gone off the wagon, but it is good to see your true colors.

Hehehe.. Poor CT.. Boy this really rubs you up don't it?? LOL

Let's put it this way sunshine. I doubt VERY MUCH that liberals are out there eating chicken in droves. I suspect greatly that many liberals in this nation suffer from the same problem that the ones here do. Do I need to mention it one more time? As far as polls go, well, they are what they are, exactly that, an annonymous poll. What really counts is the voting booth. Using that metric gay marriage is barely tolerated, and NEVER not once has it been voted in as the law of the land. Which means, (And I'm no genuis just an Ashkenazi Jew) that you're gay cause is a long way off -or- you can continue along your path of having single judges and overwhelmingly democratic legislatures do your bidding. Not a bad tactic but hardly one where one could claim that since 5 states recognize SSM America must be coming around..


Tim-
 
Hehehe.. Poor CT.. Boy this really rubs you up don't it?? LOL

Let's put it this way sunshine. I doubt VERY MUCH that liberals are out there eating chicken in droves. I suspect greatly that many liberals in this nation suffer from the same problem that the ones here do. Do I need to mention it one more time? As far as polls go, well, they are what they are, exactly that, an annonymous poll. What really counts is the voting booth. Using that metric gay marriage is barely tolerated, and NEVER not once has it been voted in as the law of the land. Which means, (And I'm no genuis just an Ashkenazi Jew) that you're gay cause is a long way off -or- you can continue along your path of having single judges and overwhelmingly democratic legislatures do your bidding. Not a bad tactic but hardly one where one could claim that since 5 states recognize SSM America must be coming around..


Tim-

Hm...okay. You seem a bit riled up about all this, but let's assume you are completely right. America is a country that will never tolerate homosexuality as a normal lifestyle. So what? It isn't Uganda. They aren't out killing us. Most people don't care. And frankly as long as I have my relationship I'm happy. While it might be a little harder for me and my partner, we will make due because that is what people who care for one another do. And there are quite a few people out there who do accept and love us for who we are. Nothing really changes.
 
Hm...okay. You seem a bit riled up about all this, but let's assume you are completely right. America is a country that will never tolerate homosexuality as a normal lifestyle. So what? It isn't Uganda. They aren't out killing us. Most people don't care. And frankly as long as I have my relationship I'm happy. While it might be a little harder for me and my partner, we will make due because that is what people who care for one another do. And there are quite a few people out there who do accept and love us for who we are. Nothing really changes.

Fair enough.


Tim-
 
Why not just ask me? I went yesterday. I support SSM and don't bash gays :shrug: It's pure ignorance (and probably hatred) to say those who supported Chick Fil A are gay bashers.

So did I. All the talk of Chick Fil A made me crave waffle fries. I don't care one way or the other about gay marriage.
 
Eats_Obesity_ObeseManEatingFriedChicken[1].jpg


A picture is worth a thousand words.
 
Why not just ask me? I went yesterday. I support SSM and don't bash gays :shrug: It's pure ignorance (and probably hatred) to say those who supported Chick Fil A are gay bashers.

You gotta talk to grim about this. He, and several other posters, seem to be under the impression that you and everyone who went to this thing are all about crushing same sex marriage.
 
I wonder what these bigots would say if I wanted too open a liqour that stays open on sunday? Or a porn shop in a small town....... or a store with a curse word (christian curse word that is ) printed on the door

The KKK would show up quicker than if someone built a mosque in manhattan...........

You would very likely be wrong about that. I've lived in the south all my life. Liquor stores and porn shops are very successful and long-standing businesses around here. Try again.
 
You would very likely be wrong about that. I've lived in the south all my life. Liquor stores and porn shops are very successful and long-standing businesses around here. Try again.
Yeah, if there was a liquor store open on Sunday, the only people showing up to shut it down would be the ****ing feds.
 
The outcome is that the mayors recanted, never took any legal action, and then they shut the hell up for a while.

But they still made the threat. They still used the position of office to put stress upon a free individual for having exercised rights. I'm sorry, but that's not acceptable. Neither in the reality that played out nor in the hypothetical I laid out.

It's not acceptable.
 
HAHAH... Awesome, outstanding! If one were near me, I'd go out and eat there everyday.. Ok well not everyday but a lot. :)

Free speech is alive and well. Now maybe the idiots that keep saying that gay marriage is finding wide spread support due to their fake and biased polls even though everywhere it's come up for a vote it was turned down resoundingly will realize that perhaps gay marriage isn't as acceptable as some might delude themselves into thinking. At best gaydom tolerated, but I doubt it will ever be accepted as a normally functioning lifestyle choice.


Tim-

It shall be for sure. I don't think that what you saw here was 100% everyone against SSM, I do believe that because of government involvement and their threat of force against the free exercise of rights, that the response was exacerbated.
 
But they still made the threat. They still used the position of office to put stress upon a free individual for having exercised rights. I'm sorry, but that's not acceptable. Neither in the reality that played out nor in the hypothetical I laid out.

It's not acceptable.

I agree it's not acceptable. But it is also not to the level of them having actually acted on it. Politicians say stupid **** as much as Chick fil a owners do.
 
Back
Top Bottom