• 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

Should business owners hold opinions/donate towards them without fear of punishment?


  • Total voters
    43
I think the CEO of Chik-fil-A is a genius. He got millions of dollars of advertising for free and probably the busiest day of company history thanks to Huckabee and Fox, which the theme fit right into their base. I suspect it might have been planned.

For the record I am Christian and have always respected CFA for putting it money where it mouth (beliefs) were and closing on Sunday. But I dont agree with the message.
 
I think the CEO of Chik-fil-A is a genius. He got millions of dollars of advertising for free and probably the busiest day of company history thanks to Huckabee and Fox, which the theme fit right into their base. I suspect it might have been planned.

For the record I am Christian and have always respected CFA for putting it money where it mouth (beliefs) were and closing on Sunday. But I dont agree with the message.

This pretty much sums up my entire philosophy on the issue.

Only, while I am a Deist and not Christian, having grown up in the bible belt and an early childhood christian myself, I still have respect for those who have other beliefs than me.

And no, I don't agree with the opinion (considering it was in response to a question he tried to avoid) of the founder.
 
Do businesses have a right to expect that political activities done with their profits won't ever come around to bite them in the ass?

No.

If Whole Foods donated to the Imperial Klans of America I wouldn't shop there.
 
Punishment is a strong word.

So a couple of mayors said something stupid Wake... no one got "punished".

If the government threatens they may take action that will restrict you from doing something that would generally be a somewhat lengthy process with many ways they could slow it up and likely would take significant cash resources to fight in court to get overturned, it's likely to cause you to rethink the actions you are/were going to take for fear of the threat becoming reality and causing your time and resources to be wasted. Even the threat of such a violation of the 1st amendment can cause damages which is part of what made the mayors statements problematic. Even if it was just a "threat", the government shouldn't be "threatening" tha they'll do something in violation of the constitution as a means of deterring people from taking legitimate action (in this case, action needed to open up a business).

Specific to the OP's question alone:

"Do you think a business owner should be able to hold an opinion and/or donate in favor of certain beliefs, without being punished by politicians/government?"

Yes, I do, as long as the acti non the business's part isn't somehow illegal itself.
 
Do businesses have a right to expect that political activities done with their profits won't ever come around to bite them in the ass?

No.

If Whole Foods donated to the Imperial Klans of America I wouldn't shop there.


No they dont but its not just business that you dont like their political stands...its ALL OF THEM....If chikafil is going to be boycotted for its presidents beliefs...then JC Penny, Starbucks and Target and Amazon should be confronted with the same problems....there are two sides to this issue and if it isnt split down the middle the chikafil side has an edge.

Boycotting and political tolls and financial tolls arent reserved just for those company stances we disagree with....The chikafil president agree with him or not...had every much a right to state what he feels as did the CEO of Amazon and Starbucks...like it or not.
 
No they dont but its not just business that you dont like their political stands...its ALL OF THEM....If chikafil is going to be boycotted for its presidents beliefs...then JC Penny, Starbucks and Target and Amazon should be confronted with the same problems....there are two sides to this issue and if it isnt split down the middle the chikafil side has an edge.

Boycotting and political tolls and financial tolls arent reserved just for those company stances we disagree with....The chikafil president agree with him or not...had every much a right to state what he feels as did the CEO of Amazon and Starbucks...like it or not.

Really, I was trying to point out out the inherent lack of specificity in Wake's poll.

For a minute there I thought of not going to Chik-Fil-A in the heat of the controversy. But then I realized marriage equality is inevitable, no matter how much Chik-Fil-A donates to anti-gay bigot groups. So I keep eating there, because their chicken is awesome and they treat their employees better than most fast-food chains.

In reality, no store is going to donate to universally unpopular campaigns or ideas. But that doesn't mean that activities undertaken by private companies will never have consequences out in the free market of ideas.

No business owner has the right or even a good reason to expect that what they do and say will never affect their business. The idea of a city banning a business for their opinions is ridiculous and legally dubious, but individual consumers are free to vote with their dollars.
 
Really, I was trying to point out out the inherent lack of specificity in Wake's poll.

For a minute there I thought of not going to Chik-Fil-A in the heat of the controversy. But then I realized marriage equality is inevitable, no matter how much Chik-Fil-A donates to anti-gay bigot groups. So I keep eating there, because their chicken is awesome and they treat their employees better than most fast-food chains.
.
In reality, no store is going to donate to universally unpopular campaigns or ideas. But that doesn't mean that activities undertaken by private companies will never have consequences out in the free market of ideas.

No business owner has the right or even a good reason to expect that what they do and say will never affect their business. The idea of a city banning a business for their opinions is ridiculous and legally dubious, but individual consumers are free to vote with their dollars.



Your right in almost everything youve said including Gay marriage will be law eventually.....but presidents of business have free speech like everyone else...if their speaking their mind hurts their business that was their doing, they have to decide whether making a political statement is worth any changes to their business.
Im sure the CEOs of Amazon, Starbucks, JCPenny thought about the consequences of their announcements just like Chikafil....what made the chikafil announcment much worse was...There was no huge outcry and footstamping over Amazon JCpenny and Starbucks...but OMG chikafil dareth say the opposite and everyone went STARK RAVING NUTS...then they flopped like a wet mop and it backfired...that was the problem with chikafil...if they had just accepted that the president of chikafil had as much right to state HIS opinion as Amazon and Starbucks there would have been far less an issue over all this...
 
I think the CEO of Chik-fil-A is a genius.

I wouldn't say he's a genius, I think that he perchance had a bit of the ol' serendipity on this one.
 
Right up until this second...I have never set a foot inside a chikafil...but after reading these threads and many comments how good the chicken is damnit you got me wanting to try it and see if it is that good....the damn gay issue has no bearing on whether ill go in there or not or anywhere else for that matter..I still buy from amazon and jcpenny....ive been buying from pennies for decades not going to stop now.
 
Right up until this second...I have never set a foot inside a chikafil...but after reading these threads and many comments how good the chicken is damnit you got me wanting to try it and see if it is that good....the damn gay issue has no bearing on whether ill go in there or not or anywhere else for that matter..I still buy from amazon and jcpenny....ive been buying from pennies for decades not going to stop now.

It's the pickle. Really.
 
So long as the organizations they're donating to are not terrorist groups or illegal activities then yeah. They should be able to express whatever view they want and donate to whomever they want without government censorship or penalty.
 
Last edited:
So long as the organizations they're donating to are not terrorist groups or illegal activities then yeah. They should be able to express whatever few they want and donate to whomever they want without government censorship or penalty.

I agree we cant pick and choose to hear only what we want to hear...
 
So long as the organizations they're donating to are not terrorist groups or illegal activities then yeah. They should be able to express whatever few they want and donate to whomever they want without government censorship or penalty.

That's the crux.

Government authority cannot be used to silence unpopular ideas espoused by private citizens.

Public opinion can, through marginalization and mockery.
 
A business should have a right to cater to and steer toward the clientele they wish to. It's a slippery slope granted, and the business should not be exempt from any bad press or the condemnation of most of the society which they may be offending due to their stances or practices. They should be allowed basically to do as they please so long as no actual laws are being broken. What results from that is on them. So no, no legal punishment.
 
Ummm, not to beat a dead horse, but the OP and the post question are worded differently which is the reason for some ambiguity in the answers. Many thought they had to clarify, including me.

I couldn't fit the entire question in the OP into the poll's question space.
 
This whole issue about Chick-fil-A has imo boiled down to whether or not business owners have the right to hold an opinion/donate in favor of their beliefs, without being punished. The ACLU has even stepped up to defend Chick-fil-A's rights. I think that so long as the ACLU, which is typically left-leaning, supports the rights of businesses with vastly differing beliefs, America's freedoms are preserved. My simple yes/no question is this:

"Do you think a business owner should be able to hold an opinion and/or donate in favor of certain beliefs, without being punished by politicians/government?"


Why would business owners be exempt from the rights everybody else in the country have?
 
It depends, if they are donating money to illegal things then they should be punished.

Other than that the government shouldn't do anything, but they should be well aware that their customer base may shrink.

Or grow as the case maybe.

Most people woldn't have know what organizations the company was donating money to if the 3 governers hadn't opend up their big mouths.

The majority of people don't care what a CEO does with his money.
 
I've had it, off and on, since I was a kid.
Never once, have I thought, "lets go to Chick-Fil-A."

So it doesn't have the same addictive qualities that KFC has?
 
Really, I was trying to point out out the inherent lack of specificity in Wake's poll.

For a minute there I thought of not going to Chik-Fil-A in the heat of the controversy. But then I realized marriage equality is inevitable, no matter how much Chik-Fil-A donates to anti-gay bigot groups. So I keep eating there, because their chicken is awesome and they treat their employees better than most fast-food chains.

In reality, no store is going to donate to universally unpopular campaigns or ideas. But that doesn't mean that activities undertaken by private companies will never have consequences out in the free market of ideas.

No business owner has the right or even a good reason to expect that what they do and say will never affect their business. The idea of a city banning a business for their opinions is ridiculous and legally dubious, but individual consumers are free to vote with their dollars.

That is a good point.

Shouldn't a business be judged on how they treat people they actually interact with?

A lot of people don't shop at Wal-Mart because of how they supposedly treat the employees, so shouldn't those same people eat at Chick-Fil-A because of the way they treat their employees?
 
That is a good point.

Shouldn't a business be judged on how they treat people they actually interact with?

A lot of people don't shop at Wal-Mart because of how they supposedly treat the employees, so shouldn't those same people eat at Chick-Fil-A because of the way they treat their employees?

Not only that.... its the one fast food place where Friendly Service is a 98% certainty compaired to McDonalds and Taco Hell and Booger King where 80% of the time Someone is throwing **** out the drive through window at you with a scowl on their face.
 
I'm still surprised at the utter ridiculousness and drama as a result of a man simply giving his answer during an interview.

Those people ought to back the **** off.
 
I think they should be able to do so without fear of punishment from the government or law. People can "punish" or reward a business based on their values if they want.
 
Other than that the government shouldn't do anything, but they should be well aware that their customer base may shrink.

Or grow as the case maybe.

325792_416499075052496_1033324755_o.jpg 387047_452476834786615_217873326_n.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom