• 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!

Muppets owner Lisa Henson severs ties with Chick-Fil-A over SSM

TheNextEra said:
Show me those Muslim owners that grand stand and go out of their way to say Marriage is between a man and a woman and speak for the company. Those are the people I will boycott.

Tell me, why was it important for this owner to go out of their way and announce, as CEO of Chik-Fil-A, that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Remember, it was the CEO that brought the company into this.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of Muslims. And a lot of the time they are far more strict than Christians who as a whole are very relaxed in their beliefs. Your logic here is flawed. Why won't you at least apply this universally? If you are going to boycott Chick Fil A it would make sense that you boycott business run by Muslims, and Jewish people too. Pretty much any person who is religious.

Do you know who James Kirkman is? He is Christian, he has donated money to various Christian organizations that are anti ssm. He is the head of a large company. Do you think he should be boycotted too?
 
TheNextEra said:
Show me those Muslim owners that grand stand and go out of their way to say Marriage is between a man and a woman and speak for the company. Those are the people I will boycott.

Tell me, why was it important for this owner to go out of their way and announce, as CEO of Chik-Fil-A, that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Remember, it was the CEO that brought the company into this.
Click to expand...

Also he didnt go oout of his way, he was asked in an interview. After re-reading this you seem ok with people who oppose ssm and people who fund it programs that are working against it, people who advocate against. But you draw the line when they admit in a radio interview? Or only when the media blows it out of proportion? Help me to understand this one.
 
winston53660 said:
No one is singling out Christians . The story just so happens to be a guy who claims to be Christian.
Click to expand...

Then why arent the pro ssm people boycotting businesses of other religions that oppose ssm? why arent they protesting outside mosques? In fact many of the same people who support ssm seem to be the same people pushing tolerance for muslims and pushing to help them get a larger presence in communities. These same people are helping and advocating for more mosques in our country. Tell me, for a religion that does not agree with homosexual behavior and strongly and in some cases violently opposes homosexuality why advocate so strongly for muslims? Why is their religion more tolerable than Christianity?
 
muciti said:
The vast majority of Muslims. And a lot of the time they are far more strict than Christians who as a whole are very relaxed in their beliefs. Your logic here is flawed. Why won't you at least apply this universally? If you are going to boycott Chick Fil A it would make sense that you boycott business run by Muslims, and Jewish people too. Pretty much any person who is religious.
Click to expand...

When those owners speak for their companies about marriage, let me know. This CEO went out of their way to make this announcment in name of their company.

muciti said:
Do you know who James Kirkman is? He is Christian, he has donated money to various Christian organizations that are anti ssm. He is the head of a large company. Do you think he should be boycotted too?
Click to expand...

If he has donated in the name of the company to those organizations, sure.
 
muciti said:
Also he didnt go oout of his way, he was asked in an interview. After re-reading this you seem ok with people who oppose ssm and people who fund it programs that are working against it, people who advocate against. But you draw the line when they admit in a radio interview? Or only when the media blows it out of proportion? Help me to understand this one.
Click to expand...

They went out of their way agianst SSM. Ever heard of "no comment" or "I can't speak for the whole company"?

Wow that would be unheard of though right?

Seems you have a problem with boycotting in general, why is that? Are you against people using their freedom of speech?
 
TheNextEra said:
They went out of their way agianst SSM. Ever heard of "no comment" or "I can't speak for the whole company"?

Wow that would be unheard of though right?

Seems you have a problem with boycotting in general, why is that? Are you against people using their freedom of speech?
Click to expand...

You didnt answer my questions. If I am understanding you correctly you don't have a problem with the fact that he funds anti ssm organizations, or that he is anti ssm, your issue is that he said it?
 
TheNextEra said:
They went out of their way agianst SSM. Ever heard of "no comment" or "I can't speak for the whole company"?

Wow that would be unheard of though right?

Seems you have a problem with boycotting in general, why is that? Are you against people using their freedom of speech?
Click to expand...

It seems YOU have a serious problem with the definition of boycott; a person may decide not to do businees with a firm or those that run their advertisements, but that is FAR different from the GOV'T denying equal protection of the law to that firm, based ONLY upon their political views. If this firm discriminated against someone or had a personnel policy to do so, then PERHAPS after repeated offenses then they could lose their business license, but to PREVENT them from opening with ZERO violations of any law is simply denying them free speech. Why did these SAME folks support Obama when he was for the definition of marriage as ONE man and ONE woman? How can these same folks NOT ban all who support Islam, a religion that would make homosexuality a CRIME that may be punished by death? Hmm...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It seems YOU have a serious problem with the definition of boycott; a person may decide not to do businees with a firm or those that run their advertisements, but that is FAR different from the GOV'T denying equal protection of the law to that firm, based ONLY upon their political views. If this firm discriminated against someone or had a personnel policy to do so, then PERHAPS after repeated offenses then they could lose their business license, but to PREVENT them from opening with ZERO violations of any law is simply denying them free speech. Why did these SAME folks support Obama when he was for the definition of marriage as ONE man and ONE woman? How can these same folks NOT ban all who support Islam, a religion that would make homosexuality a CRIME that may be punished by death? Hmm...
Click to expand...

Perhaps we should start revoking the business licenses of all those who don't vocally support SSM. Or anyone who speaks out against the Democratic Party. Or those who are Muslim. This is a reminder that, "They will, eventually, come for you."
 
muciti said:
You didnt answer my questions. If I am understanding you correctly you don't have a problem with the fact that he funds anti ssm organizations, or that he is anti ssm, your issue is that he said it?
Click to expand...

My issue is with the fact he is speaking for the company on this and his comapny funds those organizations.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It seems YOU have a serious problem with the definition of boycott; a person may decide not to do businees with a firm or those that run their advertisements, but that is FAR different from the GOV'T denying equal protection of the law to that firm, based ONLY upon their political views. If this firm discriminated against someone or had a personnel policy to do so, then PERHAPS after repeated offenses then they could lose their business license, but to PREVENT them from opening with ZERO violations of any law is simply denying them free speech. Why did these SAME folks support Obama when he was for the definition of marriage as ONE man and ONE woman? How can these same folks NOT ban all who support Islam, a religion that would make homosexuality a CRIME that may be punished by death? Hmm...
Click to expand...

Again, you'll have to show me where I have said it is ok for the government to abuse their power in this instance. I have CONSISTANTLY said I am all for individuals boycotting, NOT a person who is in a position of government abusing their power to stop this.
 
TheNextEra said:
My issue is with the fact he is speaking for the company on this and his comapny funds those organizations.
Click to expand...

No. HE funds those organizations with money he makes from being the head of the company. HE spoke as a person who happens to be the head of a company. At least I am pretty sure he makes donations in his own name. I am not quite sure how to check that.
 
TheNextEra said:
So, those that are FOR SSM have EVERY right to boycott that company because of it.
Click to expand...

And by that logic they should be boycotting any business run by a muslim, jew, or largely any religious group. Instead these same ssm advocates are fighing to help the muslim faith grow and open mosques that are going to help advocate against ssm. Talk about hypocrisy.
 
muciti said:
Thank you for proving my point. He takes his money that he earns as the owner of Chick Fil A and then puts it into a foundation called the Winshape Foundation. Thru the winshape foundation he makes donations to various Christian organizations who share his religious beliefs.
Click to expand...

Read it again, in the interview he clearly states that the COMPANY believes in those values and not in "Adam and Steve". Therefore, in the name of the comapny he funds these organizations.

Jesus why are you against freedom of speech for people wanting to boycott this company?
 
muciti said:
And by that logic they should be boycotting any business run by a muslim, jew, or largely any religious group. Instead these same ssm advocates are fighing to help the muslim faith grow and open mosques that are going to help advocate against ssm. Talk about hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

If the presidents, CEO, and owners of those places SPEAK FOR THE COMPANY like Chik-Fil-A has, then yes.

Show me where those people have like Chik-Fil-A.
 
TheNextEra said:
If the presidents, CEO, and owners of those places SPEAK FOR THE COMPANY like Chik-Fil-A has, then yes.

Show me where those people have like Chik-Fil-A.
Click to expand...

Again so your issue is not with the fact that the oppose ssm, contribute money to ssm, advocate or preach against it, or anything else. It just when they answer a question about it when asked? Think about that logic. By your line of thought is person A donated 15 million dollars in company profits to directly stopping ssm, and person B donated none but said in an interview that he was for marriage between a man and woman you are more upset by B.
 
muciti said:
Again so your issue is not with the fact that the oppose ssm, contribute money to ssm, advocate or preach against it, or anything else. It just when they answer a question about it when asked? Think about that logic. By your line of thought is person A donated 15 million dollars in company profits to directly stopping ssm, and person B donated none but said in an interview that he was for marriage between a man and woman you are more upset by B.
Click to expand...

It's clear you and I are not going to agree on this, so I will just conclude that because they are SPEAKING FOR THE COMPANY and what values the COMPANY has, they are subject to boycott of said company if someone does not like those values.

In the interview they weren't speaking as an individual, they were speaking for the company. Get it?
 
TheNextEra said:
Read it again, in the interview he clearly states that the COMPANY believes in those values and not in "Adam and Steve". Therefore, in the name of the comapny he funds these organizations.

Jesus why are you against freedom of speech for people wanting to boycott this company?
Click to expand...

Denying a business license is NOT a public boycott.
 
TheNextEra said:
It's clear you and I are not going to agree on this, so I will just conclude that because they are SPEAKING FOR THE COMPANY and what values the COMPANY has, they are subject to boycott of said company if someone does not like those values.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. But boycotting by the general public and discrimination by government officials are two very different animals.
 
TheNextEra said:
It's clear you and I are not going to agree on this, so I will just conclude that because they are SPEAKING FOR THE COMPANY and what values the COMPANY has, they are subject to boycott of said company if someone does not like those values.

In the interview they weren't speaking as an individual, they were speaking for the company. Get it?
Click to expand...

Show me where the company has ever discriminated against homosexuals. I'll wait here while you look into that.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Denying a business license is NOT a public boycott.
Click to expand...

Are you having trouble reading my comments?

I never claimed denying a business license WAS a public boycott. I even stated that it was wrong.

What I agree with is individuals boycotting the company.
 
muciti said:
Show me where the company has ever discriminated against homosexuals. I'll wait here while you look into that.
Click to expand...

I never said it has. However, they as a company speak against SSM. As a company, they will be boycotted by people that strongly disagree with that message.

Tell me, if a CEO said "The company ABC does not believe in interracial marriage", would you then not expect people to boycott said company?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom