It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mayor of Boston to Chick-Fil-A: Get Lost!!!!

page: 11
30
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination


edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


They are supporting discrimination. A business that supports discrimination should not be allowed to operate in the United States.


I will admit I've not been following this matter concerning Chik Fil, did the CEO say he wouldn't be hiring gays? Have any gay employees accused the franchise of not treating them fairly? If so then yes there's discrimination issues. However I think this is a issue of a CEO expressing his personal feelings on (correct me if I'm wrong) gay marriage? What law did he break by not thinking gay marriage is not legitimate or whatever his stance is on the issue?




posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Has Chick-Fil-A ever discriminated against a customer or employee on any basis that warrants this kind of treatment? I'm sure other business in Boston have far worse records than Chick-Fil-A, yet I don't see the Mayor going after them. Everybody talks about them be discriminatory, when it looks like all they do is support outside causes that they deem worthwhile. If that's the standard we are going to set..... it's a slippery slope.



You hit the nail on the proverbial head.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination


edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


They are supporting discrimination. A business that supports discrimination should not be allowed to operate in the United States.


I will admit I've not been following this matter concerning Chik Fil, did the CEO say he wouldn't be hiring gays? Have any gay employees accused the franchise of not treating them fairly? If so then yes there's discrimination issues. However I think this is a issue of a CEO expressing his personal feelings on (correct me if I'm wrong) gay marriage? What law did he break by not thinking gay marriage is not legitimate or whatever his stance is on the issue?


Not affording homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples is discrimination. And if you agree that homosexuals should not have the same rights, then you're supporting discrimination.

It really is that simple.
edit on 7/26/2012 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination




Well, they have been sued for religious discrimination. You'll appreciate this, OpinionatedB -- it was by a Muslim who claimed he was fired because he refused to participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program.


Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms
.

www.forbes.com...



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I made a topic asking to discuss those issues concerning legality etc and it was moved to relationships forums.

Since the thread I made is not concerning relationships of other people, but political stances and legailty and reasoning for all.... I asked it to be closed and will not speak on the issue,

I do not want anyones personal relationships discussed under my name. That is my stance, in this topic, it is off topic as this is about a governments right to deny a business the ability to do business unheeded by government officials based on personal opinions and religious beliefs.


Wrong, you stated and I quote:


No, changing the definition of marriage has the potential to risk an already shaky constitutional right I currently hold.....


That is certainly within this thread as the link will show and is on topic as you used it as a means to counter a point made by another member.

If you don't want to discuss certain things then perhaps you should not mention them in a thread?

As I asked before, please explain this quote to me, it seems relevent in the sense that your personal beliefs on this issue are effecting your decision making in policy/politics.

As for the government preventing a business from operating in it's vecinity, that is within the actual written laws of the Boston and the Mayor has a duty to uphold the views and general sensibilities of the population in Boston.

They are very pro gay you could say, therefore a business that is anti-gay has no business operating in Boston.

It's funny how you would claim that denying service to gays, or funding hate groups isn't discrimination, but a government standing up for the opinions and beliefs of it's constituency is..

~Tenth


edit on 7/26/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)

edit on 7/26/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Seems as though Chicago is joining in.



Chicago alderman to block Chick-fil-A expansion

A Chicago alderman, angered by the president of Chick-fil-A's comments that he is against gay marriage, said he will block the company from building a restaurant in his ward.

Alderman Joe Moreno said Wednesday that unless the company comes up with a written anti-discrimination policy, Chick-fil-A will not open its first free-standing restaurant in the city as it plans to do.

"They have nothing on the books that says they do not discriminate and they are open to everyone," said Moreno, whose ward is on the northwest side. "I want to see that policy before they go forward."

Read more: www.foxnews.com...



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


you are correct it was wrong of me to mention that in this thread. I do apologize.

As I stated, I have attempted that discussion elsewhere.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination




Well, they have been sued for religious discrimination. You'll appreciate this, OpinionatedB -- it was by a Muslim who claimed he was fired because he refused to participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program.


Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms
.

www.forbes.com...


Alright, ya thats just messed up. Your religion should not effect your job.
Mad thumbs down to CFA



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination




Well, they have been sued for religious discrimination. You'll appreciate this, OpinionatedB -- it was by a Muslim who claimed he was fired because he refused to participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program.


Chick-fil-A, the corporate parent, has been sued at least 12 times since 1988 on charges of employment discrimination, according to records in U.S. District Courts. Aziz Latif, a former Chick-fil-A restaurant manager in Houston, sued the company in 2002 after Latif, a Muslim, says he was fired a day after he didn't participate in a group prayer to Jesus Christ at a company training program in 2000. The suit was settled on undisclosed terms
.

www.forbes.com...



Good find, guess that clears that argument up



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

As a Mayor his personal beliefs are suppose to be on the backburner. There's nothing wrong with principles but you must keep your personal principles in check in a public office, in your own business you can be as principled as one can stand to be. Yes I do agree at election time this issue will be a thorn in his side or a winning point.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Perhaps this Mayor should use the example the CEO of Chic-fil-a set when he put his personal beliefs on the backburner




The CEO is representing the company not a public official, there's a difference. Yes I think the CEO should've kept his personal opinions to himself or within his social arena but him do otherwise is not wrong. What would be wrong is for him to deny Civil Rights to another person because of his opinions. The Mayor is representing the general public and he's suppose to keep their best in mind. Not liking what a CEO of a corporation think about "gay marriage" personally is fine. However to speak on behalf of the city that the corp can bypass their city he didn't have the well being of the citizens of his city in mind.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

As a Mayor his personal beliefs are suppose to be on the backburner. There's nothing wrong with principles but you must keep your personal principles in check in a public office, in your own business you can be as principled as one can stand to be. Yes I do agree at election time this issue will be a thorn in his side or a winning point.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Perhaps this Mayor should use the example the CEO of Chic-fil-a set when he put his personal beliefs on the backburner




The CEO is representing the company not a public official, there's a difference. Yes I think the CEO should've kept his personal opinions to himself or within his social arena but him do otherwise is not wrong. What would be wrong is for him to deny Civil Rights to another person because of his opinions. The Mayor is representing the general public and he's suppose to keep their best in mind. Not liking what a CEO of a corporation think about "gay marriage" personally is fine. However to speak on behalf of the city that the corp can bypass their city he didn't have the well being of the citizens of his city in mind.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything,

A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower


As for the government preventing a business from operating in it's vecinity, that is within the actual written laws of the Boston and the Mayor has a duty to uphold the views and general sensibilities of the population in Boston.



Well, if it's within the laws, then I say GO FOR IT!! If the population of Boston doesn't like it, they can vote someone else for mayor next time. But, I have a feeling he was voted mayor because of his stance, not in spite of it.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination


edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


They are supporting discrimination. A business that supports discrimination should not be allowed to operate in the United States.


I will admit I've not been following this matter concerning Chik Fil, did the CEO say he wouldn't be hiring gays? Have any gay employees accused the franchise of not treating them fairly? If so then yes there's discrimination issues. However I think this is a issue of a CEO expressing his personal feelings on (correct me if I'm wrong) gay marriage? What law did he break by not thinking gay marriage is not legitimate or whatever his stance is on the issue?


Not affording homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples is discrimination. And if you agree that homosexuals should not have the same rights, then you're supporting discrimination.

It really is that simple.
edit on 7/26/2012 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)


Yadda333 this isn't about what I think it's about a Mayor deciding his city didn't need a corporation operating within it's boundaries because the CEO think gay marriage is not legitimate. This is about Civil Rights being denied, did the CEO say he wouldn't afford the gay married employee the same benefits as the hetero married employee? If he said that then he would be discriminating and prime for legal action?



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580

Y
Chic-fil-A supports hate groups by donating money to them. Nearly 2 million to anti gay hate groups.



Please prove your claim. Hate Group is a very strong word. I have glanced at the groups Chick-Fil-A supports, I don't think they fit the Hate Group category. They are against Gay Marriage that's for sure.




A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other designated sector of society. According to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), hate groups' "primary purpose is to promote animosity, hostility, and malice against persons belonging to a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin which differs from that of the members of the organization."
.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination


edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


They are supporting discrimination. A business that supports discrimination should not be allowed to operate in the United States.


I will admit I've not been following this matter concerning Chik Fil, did the CEO say he wouldn't be hiring gays? Have any gay employees accused the franchise of not treating them fairly? If so then yes there's discrimination issues. However I think this is a issue of a CEO expressing his personal feelings on (correct me if I'm wrong) gay marriage? What law did he break by not thinking gay marriage is not legitimate or whatever his stance is on the issue?


Not affording homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples is discrimination. And if you agree that homosexuals should not have the same rights, then you're supporting discrimination.

It really is that simple.
edit on 7/26/2012 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)


Yadda333 this isn't about what I think it's about a Mayor deciding his city didn't need a corporation operating within it's boundaries because the CEO think gay marriage is not legitimate. This is about Civil Rights being denied, did the CEO say he wouldn't afford the gay married employee the same benefits as the hetero married employee? If he said that then he would be discriminating and prime for legal action?


Chick Fil A supports discrimination against homosexual couples. The CEO publicly stated it. Our society should not allow businesses who support discrimination (support is the key word) to operate here.

I didn't think it needed to be clarified, but just in case: When I used the term "you" I meant in the general sense--not you personally.

edit on 7/26/2012 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

As a Mayor his personal beliefs are suppose to be on the backburner. There's nothing wrong with principles but you must keep your personal principles in check in a public office, in your own business you can be as principled as one can stand to be. Yes I do agree at election time this issue will be a thorn in his side or a winning point.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Perhaps this Mayor should use the example the CEO of Chic-fil-a set when he put his personal beliefs on the backburner




The CEO is representing the company not a public official, there's a difference. Yes I think the CEO should've kept his personal opinions to himself or within his social arena but him do otherwise is not wrong. What would be wrong is for him to deny Civil Rights to another person because of his opinions. The Mayor is representing the general public and he's suppose to keep their best in mind. Not liking what a CEO of a corporation think about "gay marriage" personally is fine. However to speak on behalf of the city that the corp can bypass their city he didn't have the well being of the citizens of his city in mind.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything,

A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not


Exactly Mayor's a suppose to have political opinions but they're not suppose to be governed by their personal feelings on the jobs. CEO can have whatever kind of opinions they want, political, social, or religious. Whether or not their opinions will be upheld by the corporation they're employed with is another story. I would be worried when I discover my Mayor is running the city based on his or her person views and not legalities.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by yadda333
 


That business has never once discriminated against anyone, they hire people from all races religions and creeds, sexual orientation and so forth...

they have never once been charged with discrimination


edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


They are supporting discrimination. A business that supports discrimination should not be allowed to operate in the United States.


I will admit I've not been following this matter concerning Chik Fil, did the CEO say he wouldn't be hiring gays? Have any gay employees accused the franchise of not treating them fairly? If so then yes there's discrimination issues. However I think this is a issue of a CEO expressing his personal feelings on (correct me if I'm wrong) gay marriage? What law did he break by not thinking gay marriage is not legitimate or whatever his stance is on the issue?


Not affording homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples is discrimination. And if you agree that homosexuals should not have the same rights, then you're supporting discrimination.

It really is that simple.
edit on 7/26/2012 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)


Yadda333 this isn't about what I think it's about a Mayor deciding his city didn't need a corporation operating within it's boundaries because the CEO think gay marriage is not legitimate. This is about Civil Rights being denied, did the CEO say he wouldn't afford the gay married employee the same benefits as the hetero married employee? If he said that then he would be discriminating and prime for legal action?


Chick Fil A supports discrimination against homosexual couples. The CEO publicly stated it. Our society should not allow businesses who support discrimination (support is the key word) to operate here.

I didn't think it needed to be clarified, but just in case: When I used the term "you" I meant in the general sense--not you personally.

edit on 7/26/2012 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)


Yadda333 what I'm trying to understand is did the CEO say he wouldn't hire or extend the same benefits to a gay married person?



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


That seems a bit funny, like the article makes them out to be extremeists or something. But I know of someone (whom I did talk to before stating some of the things I did) who says he went and applied and got hired no problems, and has loved his job.

He is not a christian.

So I do not know, if they have been sued then perhaps it is the fault of individuals, or some management, and perhaps Chik fil A could work on that much harder.

But if they have been sued, 12 times since 1988, which the article does not say they won, or they lost, or they settled in any case but one...that is still once every two years...

which is a bit much I agree, but some people we dont know about either.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Chai_An

As a Mayor his personal beliefs are suppose to be on the backburner. There's nothing wrong with principles but you must keep your personal principles in check in a public office, in your own business you can be as principled as one can stand to be. Yes I do agree at election time this issue will be a thorn in his side or a winning point.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Perhaps this Mayor should use the example the CEO of Chic-fil-a set when he put his personal beliefs on the backburner




The CEO is representing the company not a public official, there's a difference. Yes I think the CEO should've kept his personal opinions to himself or within his social arena but him do otherwise is not wrong. What would be wrong is for him to deny Civil Rights to another person because of his opinions. The Mayor is representing the general public and he's suppose to keep their best in mind. Not liking what a CEO of a corporation think about "gay marriage" personally is fine. However to speak on behalf of the city that the corp can bypass their city he didn't have the well being of the citizens of his city in mind.
edit on 26-7-2012 by Chai_An because: (no reason given)



Id be abit worried if my elected Mayor had no political opinions or interest in politics. If anything,

A Mayor is suppose is have a political opinion, a CEO representing a company is not


Exactly Mayor's a suppose to have political opinions but they're not suppose to be governed by their personal feelings on the jobs. CEO can have whatever kind of opinions they want, political, social, or religious. Whether or not their opinions will be upheld by the corporation they're employed with is another story. I would be worried when I discover my Mayor is running the city based on his or her person views and not legalities.


This doesn't make any sense. They elected the Mayor because of his beliefs. All politicians campaign on their beliefs. What do you expect?

Why are you siding with a company that publicly supports discrimination? I would be concerned if my representative supported discrimination (of course where I live they probably do).



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Chai_An
 


I believe the proof of actual discrimination by Chick Fil A has been posted, but it doesn't matter because the CEO publicly stated that he supports discriminatory policies.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join