• 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!

Religious Bigotry at the New Yorker?

JMR said:
I've never eaten at Chick Fil A, and until this article had no idea they were controversial. A long long time ago I swore off ever eating pizza at Domino's because they supported Operation Rescue, refused to buy Coor's products because of their support of right wing causes and the Heritage Foundation, and don't shop at Walmart because they have put so many small businesses out of business. So we can all choose where to shop, and seeing this support for anti-gay legislation from Chick Fil A, they are on my list also. Nothing to do with being anti-Christian, just I see no reason to support companies that work against issues I feel strongly about.
Click to expand...

Aren't the majority of these small business ones that would've been owned by economic conservatives whom you don't want to support?
 
vesper said:
I could post a story like this every week where Christians are being targeted. Heck just a few weeks ago look what VP Pence went through in the media because of his faith being ridiculed and mocked.

Well let me school you all. Keep it up because folks are taking notice and taking names. Between these continuous jabs at those of faith so prominent in the media on a weekly basis and the new poster child for the left, David Hogg calling for gun bans are reminiscent to how Obama describe them in 2008, "cling to their guns and their religion". The left is doing a fine job of motivating those on the right to make darn good and sure Pelosi nor Chucky Schumer never gets leadership in 2018. Those who normally skip the midterms will be dragging their butts to the polls. You can take that to the bank.
Click to expand...

Take this to the same bank- Protestants who despise pornography and anyone who's involved will stay home in droves. They will be reminded, constantly. In 2020, too, and all those teen-agers who turn of age before then will show up. In droves, and having taken names.
 
JMR said:
I've never eaten at Chick Fil A, and until this article had no idea they were controversial. A long long time ago I swore off ever eating pizza at Domino's because they supported Operation Rescue, refused to buy Coor's products because of their support of right wing causes and the Heritage Foundation, and don't shop at Walmart because they have put so many small businesses out of business. So we can all choose where to shop, and seeing this support for anti-gay legislation from Chick Fil A, they are on my list also. Nothing to do with being anti-Christian, just I see no reason to support companies that work against issues I feel strongly about.
Click to expand...

They aren't controversial. They simply had an opinion that people disagreed with. Disagreement shouldn't be controversial
 
trblmkr said:
You are splitting hairs Jack. They advocate for legislation that would, in some cases, allow them to discriminate. I understand they feel that their way of life is under attack. But it is not. They are always free to practice their religion in the home, in the church, in a park, pretty much everywhere but my house and in a public business.
Click to expand...

in other words, if you are religious you have no right to earn a living in modern society, so says the left.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Aren't the majority of these small business ones that would've been owned by economic conservatives whom you don't want to support?
Click to expand...

And how would you know who I wish to support? Did your crystal ball tell you that?
 
JMR said:
And how would you know who I wish to support? Did your crystal ball tell you that?
Click to expand...

You just outright said so, no crystal ball required. Anyone who supports non liberal causes you don't want to send your money to.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Aren't the majority of these small business ones that would've been owned by economic conservatives whom you don't want to support?
Click to expand...

'owned by conservatives'? Is this a class thing, too? Liberals are employees, conservatives entrepreneurs?
In small towns everywhere, 'WalMart' has become a verb, as in, "The down-town was WalMarted and there's empty shops all along the street." You pretty sure the majority of those shops were owned by conservatives?
 
CLAX1911 said:
They aren't controversial. They simply had an opinion that people disagreed with. Disagreement shouldn't be controversial
Click to expand...

Actually if people are not eating there because of controversy (dispute, disagreement) over the owner's political actions, they are controversial. I think that is the definition.

So in my mind, supporting people financially who will use those profits to support policies I'm opposed to is not a good decision.
 
Grand Mal said:
'owned by conservatives'? Is this a class thing, too? Liberals are employees, conservatives entrepreneurs?
In small towns everywhere, 'WalMart' has become a verb, as in, "The down-town was WalMarted and there's empty shops all along the street." You pretty sure the majority of those shops were owned by conservatives?
Click to expand...

In small to medium sized towns it's simply the law of averages.

However it was the town's customers who chose not to support their local businesses and instead spend money at Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart is more efficient and offers better prices, better employee pay, more products, more services, and more property taxes then the replaced businesses did, and when Wal-Mart locates in a small town it becomes a magnet pulling more business from surrounding towns then the old businesses did, and hence is better. chances are good that Wal-Mart is generating more taxes, sales, wages, and economic growth then the mom and pops did. There's nothing at all wrong with Wal-Mart.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
In small to medium sized towns it's simply the law of averages.

However it was the town's customers who chose not to support their local businesses and instead spend money at Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart is more efficient and offers better prices, better employee pay, more products, more services, and more property taxes then the replaced businesses did, and when Wal-Mart locates in a small town it becomes a magnet pulling more business from surrounding towns then the old businesses did, and hence is better. chances are good that Wal-Mart is generating more taxes, sales, wages, and economic growth then the mom and pops did. There's nothing at all wrong with Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...

Right.
You pretty sure th majority of those shops were owned by conservatives?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
You just outright said so, no crystal ball required. Anyone who supports non liberal causes you don't want to send your money to.
Click to expand...

I wonder if you are purposely misreading what I posted?

I do not support corporations that financially support organizations working to overturn my political beliefs....such as Domino's Pizza, and now Chuck Fil A. They have massive power to be heard.

I never mentioned anyone who supports non liberal causes. I applaud individuals who send a contribution to charities of their choosing. I also applaud the work they do to keep their small businesses afloat while the masses seem to enjoy the cheap China imports.

And what evidence do you have that the small businesses put under by Walmart were economic conservatives? I think they were citizens of all stripes who lost their livelihoods and ended up working hourly at the new corporate master.
 
Jack Hays said:
I am a long time subscriber to New Yorker magazine. I have even entered their caption contest a couple of times. I was nonetheless troubled by a recent hit piece on Chick-Fil-A in the magazine. The author basically says the fast food chain is too Christian to be in New York. For the record, I'm religiously agnostic and I like a Chick-Fil-A sandwich now and then. Seems to me New Yorker has indulged bigotry in this case. Here is the article in question, along with a critique from the Washington Examiner.

Chick-Fil-A's Creepy Infiltration of New York City
Dan Piepenbring, The New Yorker

. . . New York has taken to Chick-fil-A. One of the Manhattan locations estimates that it sells a sandwich every six seconds, and the company has announced plans to open as many as a dozen more storefronts in the city. And yet the brand’s arrival here feels like an infiltration, in no small part because of its pervasive Christian traditionalism. Its headquarters, in Atlanta, are adorned with Bible verses and a statue of Jesus washing a disciple’s feet. Its stores close on Sundays. Its C.E.O., Dan Cathy, has been accused of bigotry for using the company's charitable wing to fund anti-gay causes, including groups that oppose same-sex marriage. “We’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation,” he once said, “when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.’ ” The company has since reaffirmed its intention to “treat every person with honor, dignity and respect,” but it has quietly continued to donate to anti-L.G.B.T. groups. When the first stand-alone New York location opened, in 2015, a throng of protesters appeared. When a location opened in a Queens mall, in 2016, Mayor Bill de Blasio proposed a boycott. No such controversy greeted the opening of this newest outpost. Chick-fil-A’s success here is a marketing coup. Its expansion raises questions about what we expect from our fast food, and to what extent a corporation can join a community. . . .


The New Yorker's Bigoted, Intolerant Attack
Jenna Ellis, Washington Examiner

I was honestly astounded the New Yorker actually printed Dan Piepenbring’s bigoted and downright ignorant attack piece Friday titled “Chick-Fil-A’s Creepy Infiltration of New York City.”
If we want to have a good-natured debate on Chick-fil-A versus Wendy’s based solely on personal preference, I’m all for that. That's capitalism at its finest. But Piepenbring’s piece objected to the supposed “infiltration” of Chick-fil-A on the basis of its owners' religious beliefs.
Consider the overt bigotry of this headline statement: Chick-fil-A’s “emphasis on community…suggests an ulterior motive. The restaurant’s corporate purpose begins with the words ‘to glorify God,’ and that proselytism thrums below the surface of its new Fulton Street restaurant, which has the ersatz homespun ambiance of a megachurch.”. . .
Click to expand...

When I lived back east I'd read the magazine regularly. Among other things, it was a great source for what was happening in the arts and entertainment side of Manhattan. The writing was always good and many of the jokes were excellent. However, I haven't read it in years and in recent news there have been a couple of stories that are way, way below the standards I used to expect. I chalk it up to them being deep inside the Blue Bubble but it is disappointing.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
do you think they weren't?
Click to expand...

I don't see any reason to think either way about it.
Maybe it's just different societies, but where I live there's absolutely no reason to think a small-business owner is a conservative. Quite the opposite, in fact, judging by the posters in shop windows and the conversations you overhear. Actually, in my experience menial labourers are much more likely to be conservative than entrepreneurial types.
Different societies, maybe.
 
JMR said:
I wonder if you are purposely misreading what I posted?
Click to expand...
I read it exactly, you have a problem with people who are against abortion and granting marriage licenses to homosexuals and support conservative think tanks.

I do not support corporations that financially support organizations working to overturn my political beliefs....such as Domino's Pizza, and now Chuck Fil A. They have massive power to be heard.
Click to expand...
OK, so what are you arguing about here?
I never mentioned anyone who supports non liberal causes. I applaud individuals who send a contribution to charities of their choosing. I also applaud the work they do to keep their small businesses afloat while the masses seem to enjoy the cheap China imports.
Click to expand...
You specifically said so listing three different issues.

[/quote]And what evidence do you have that the small businesses put under by Walmart were economic conservatives? I think they were citizens of all stripes who lost their livelihoods and ended up working hourly at the new corporate master.[/QUOTE]

You don't tend to socialists running businesses. Also I doubt more then a small fraction of former business owners ended up working hourly at wal-mart. Wal-Mart does not destroy communities.

https://mises.org/library/does-wal-mart-destroy-communities
 
JMR said:
Actually if people are not eating there because of controversy (dispute, disagreement) over the owner's political actions, they are controversial. I think that is the definition.
Click to expand...
Disagreement isn't controversy its just discourse.



So in my mind, supporting people financially who will use those profits to support policies I'm opposed to is not a good decision.
Click to expand...
You can hold whatever opinion you want. It shouldn't be a controversy should it?
 
Its their business. They can do what they want, as long as they still treat gays like people. They don't have to serve them.
 
JMR said:
I've never eaten at Chick Fil A, and until this article had no idea they were controversial. A long long time ago I swore off ever eating pizza at Domino's because they supported Operation Rescue, refused to buy Coor's products because of their support of right wing causes and the Heritage Foundation, and don't shop at Walmart because they have put so many small businesses out of business. So we can all choose where to shop, and seeing this support for anti-gay legislation from Chick Fil A, they are on my list also. Nothing to do with being anti-Christian, just I see no reason to support companies that work against issues I feel strongly about.
Click to expand...

I do the same thing with many of the same businesses. I have a right to choose who I support just as they do. Recently I was on a business trip and my boss said lets go to Chick Fil A. I said no. He asked why, I told him. He was kind of shocked but he is from North Carolina. Its not that hard to do folks, put your money where your thoughts are.
 
JMR said:
Actually if people are not eating there because of controversy (dispute, disagreement) over the owner's political actions, they are controversial. I think that is the definition.

So in my mind, supporting people financially who will use those profits to support policies I'm opposed to is not a good decision.
Click to expand...

If people are not eating at Chick fil A because of the owner's political stance, why is it so hard to find a table there around lunch time? I don't think they're being hurt any.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I read it exactly, you have a problem with people who are against abortion and granting marriage licenses to homosexuals and support conservative think tanks.


OK, so what are you arguing about here?

You specifically said so listing three different issues.
Click to expand...
And what evidence do you have that the small businesses put under by Walmart were economic conservatives? I think they were citizens of all stripes who lost their livelihoods and ended up working hourly at the new corporate master.[/QUOTE]

You don't tend to socialists running businesses. Also I doubt more then a small fraction of former business owners ended up working hourly at wal-mart. Wal-Mart does not destroy communities.

https://mises.org/library/does-wal-mart-destroy-communities[/QUOTE]




Since you are deliberately distorting what I said, there appears little hope you can be made to understand my point.

Yes ...I listed three different issues and three different CORPORATIONS. Corporations make their financial support of political issues public. Their support is different than a $10 check sent in by a person such as yourself. So if YOU ran a small business in my town, I would most likely frequent your establishment.
I have always shopped at local merchants and support small local business. Never been in a Walmart yet.

You would be surprised at who runs businesses. (By the way, few people who are not economic conservatives are "socialists." Many are independents, democrats, progressives, and totally unaffiliated or don't give two damns. ) But it is noted that you don't believe socialists run businesses. And when the small Mom and Pop at the corner goes under, do you believe they just go get a Deutsche Bank loan and set up a new shop? They seek work where it exists, and when Walmart hits town, that is usually the only option.
 
Dittohead not! said:
If people are not eating at Chick fil A because of the owner's political stance, why is it so hard to find a table there around lunch time? I don't think they're being hurt any.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people eat there because the don't know or don't care.

For my personal choices, I choose to avoid supporting such corporate establishments.
 
JMR said:
I've never eaten at Chick Fil A, and until this article had no idea they were controversial. A long long time ago I swore off ever eating pizza at Domino's because they supported Operation Rescue, refused to buy Coor's products because of their support of right wing causes and the Heritage Foundation, and don't shop at Walmart because they have put so many small businesses out of business. So we can all choose where to shop, and seeing this support for anti-gay legislation from Chick Fil A, they are on my list also. Nothing to do with being anti-Christian, just I see no reason to support companies that work against issues I feel strongly about.
Click to expand...

I'm gay, but I still eat at Chick Fil A. Their chicken is the ****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom