Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ithinkmyliverhurts (1,814 posts) Chik-fil-a story: please clear some things up for me. I've only been able to read about it briefly, but I don't get a few things. Here's the story as I understand it, so please correct any details that have bearing on my outcome of my understanding. 1. Chik-fil-a CEO said stupid, ignorant shit about gay marriage and God. 2. Shit he said was bigoted and indefensible. 3. Mayors (SF, Boston, Chicago) thought it was bigoted and indefensible. 4. Said mayors said they would not allow Chik-fil-a in their city based on CEO's opinions/speech. This opinion was against what said cities stand for. 5. Protests against mayors' decisions but also for bigotry. So here's where I need clarification. In no way shape or form am I comfortable with government regulating businesses based on a CEO's opinion. If said CEO said he would not serve a certain customer, then, obviously, clear legal problems. But this CEO's worst crime is being an asshole who hasn't actually instituted his assholish thoughts. However, I understand progressives' protests against the protests against gay marriage. So I am of two minds here: it's seems dangerous to allow the government to limit one's livelihood based on one's political/religious opinions (good lord, we here at DU, especially those of us in red-land 'Murika, don't want this). On the other hand, if the protesters are protesting those who are outside of chik-fil-a who are protesting "the gays," then I get it. Has the media gotten it? I don't think so. Or do some here support these mayors' actions? If you support the mayors' actions, you realize this cuts both ways, right? If I have a business and speak out for gay marriage, I could as easily be banned for my opinions. Again, all of this is assuming chik-fil-a hasn't participated in discriminatory actions. As far as I know, and this is very little, the CEO expressed an opinion. Thanks, all, for for your help.
When I am unclear about something, I usually sit down and write out my understanding of it and most of the time confusion clears up.I don't think it works that way for liverhurts.
4. Said mayors said they would not allow Chik-fil-a in their city based on CEO's opinions/speech. This opinion was against what said cities stand for.
"The nation that couldn’t be conquered by foreign enemies has been conquered by its elected officials" odawg Free Republic in reference to the GOP Elites who are no difference than the Democrats
If I was a firm believer in God I think his opinion would win hands down over yours.
So I am of two minds here: it's seems dangerous to allow the government to limit one's livelihood based on one's political/religious opinions (good lord, we here at DU, especially those of us in red-land 'Murika, don't want this).
Did said Mayors express the same sentiment for Obama when he was against gay marriage?
ithinkmyliverhurts (1,814 posts) This has got to be one of the Bostonian Drunkards temporary sock-puppetsChik-fil-a story: please clear some things up for me. I've only been able to read about it briefly, but I don't get a few things. Here's the story as I understand it, so please correct any details that have bearing on my outcome of my understanding.blah blah blah etc