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

Sigh.

It's so sad people have to make a big huge deal out of this.

Some people shot their mouth off.

BIG FREAKING DEAL!

I wish people would stop acting like children over this and let people make their individual choice.

You see, this is one reason why I just cannot tell the difference between adults and children.

This is all just playground nonsense. OMFG HE DOESN'T THINK LIKE US! GET HIM!

What doers it matter if someone doesn't like another person? I you don't like just don't hang around them. Let them live their own life, live yours, and don't worry about whether one opinion is the right one.

Worrying about what another person thinks only makes you miserable, not them.

This is why I like Star Trek so much. It's all about people overcoming their petty differences and learning how to live with one another in peace and harmony.

I see none of this here. It's all a bunch of freaking crybabies getting upset because someone has a different opinion and belief than them.

Holy CRAP!

Get over yourselves.

This is not a big deal.

reply to post by EvilSadamClone

Get over yourselves. This is not a big deal.

Any violation of the Constitution is a "bid deal"

its that attitude that has the US where it is now.

death by a thousand cuts.

Its the reason we arn't marching in the streets that the POTUS can order someone killed, American or not with out trial.

Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by OpinionatedB

 

True that!

Also funny to note that if you find the right issue, people will clamor to violate Constitutional rights...

Thats an important aspect of this...

Do people just not care what these laws are about? They only seem to care for that document when it suits them!

Someday they will find out all this clamoring to remove the constitution from the law of this land is going to bite THEM in the butt someday....

And I am starting to hope it does! Maybe then they will change their tune on that document that was so carefully worded!

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

The Mayor of Boston spoke on official city letterhead with official city seal
'

that means he is speaking as a government official, declaring the city does not want a certain business in the town...

Why? because of their political stance on a religious matter!

edit on 25-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)

How is this a political stance on a religious matter? The mayor is an advocate of equal marriage rights for same sex couples, marriage rights are a political issue. Just because Chick-Fil-A cites a religious belief for their stance on a political issue that does not somehow make the issue a matter of faith or religion.

Originally posted by charles1952
I think I can resolve the freedom of speech issue. The mayor is not just "urging them" or "expressing an opinion." I followed the links given in the OP source article, and ran into something in The Boston Herald:

Mayor Thomas M. Menino is vowing to block Chick-fil-A from bringing its Southern-fried fast-food empire to Boston — possibly to a popular tourist spot just steps from the Freedom Trail — after the family-owned firm’s president suggested gay marriage is “inviting God’s judgment on our nation.”
....etc.....

bostonherald.com...

I think the Mayor may be in trouble.

ROFL - so in his letter he says "I hope that CAF doesn't come to Boston...", and in the quote yuo reproduced he says that he will use means that are all perfectly legal to prevent them coming to Boston if he can...and somehow that is still a freedom of speech issue?



Face it - he hasn't stopped CFA from sayng what they want, and he can't stop them saying what they want.

He CAN tell them what he thinks of heir attitude, and he CAN try to influence legal processes through legal means to legally affect decisions regarding business applications - just like any other citizen can, albeit perhaps a bit more easily since he presumably has easier access &/or familiarity with the processes.

NONE OF THIS is stopping CFA saying ehat hety want. Nor is it stopping them from doing business anywhere they can legally get permission to do business.

Mayors should represent their community interests - and if this is honestly how Bostonians feel then I guess that's gonna be tough for CFA - just likeit would be for any business that tries to set up in a town where the population is generally not in favour of them being there.

and if it is not how Bostonians really fel then they get an election in due course.

But it is nothing whatsoever to do with the Mayor stopping CFA saying what they want.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

if it is not how Bostonians really fel then they get an election in due course.

Do you not get that thats not how its done...

Free market should decide it, NOT the mayor.

LET them come if its really not the view of the city, than guess what, they wont go, the people will avoid the restaurant.

That cow mascot is not going to be shoving chicken down Bostonian throat as they pass by...

I'm not a Christian. I support gay-rights. But dammit, this political correctness is really gay. The guy voiced his opinion in an interview. Who cares?

Live and let live. I'm not gonna let this keep me from eating more chicken.

I just find it ironic that the president of Chick-Fil-A seems so adamant about his religious beliefs, yet has no problem trying to sell chicken sandwiches to legally married gay couples in Boston. You would think if it meant that much to him, he would refuse to set up stores in states that have legalized gay marriage. Seems greed trumps religious principles - at least in his case.

reply to post by kaylaluv

no problem trying to sell chicken sandwiches to legally married gay couples in Boston.

WHOA, when did that happen?

its been a long time since I went to Boston but last I checked there existed more than Gay married people in Boston...

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Dear Aloysius the Gaul,

Yes, the Mayor can use legal means to discourage a city, but is what he's proposing to do legal? Due Process, Equal Treatment Under the Law, Anti-Discrimination Rules, etc. All of those will make it difficult for the Mayor to say "We treated this store differently, and barred their business solely on the grounds that we don't like what's it the CEO's head."

Look at it the other way. Are you happy with the idea that the Mayor of a town can ban any activity in that town sponsored by someone who has ideas he doesn't like? I don't think we want to go down that road.

With respect,
Charles1952

The Mayor is not taking a stand against Christians. He is taking a stand against BIGOTS.

reply to post by charles1952


He's not banning it - he's trying to use legal means to discourage it from setting up.

I would expect any mayor of any town to do excactly the same for any activity that may be legal but that "we don't want around here" - and it happens all the time for various reasons - from brothels where those are legal to liquor outlets to sewage farms to all sorts of things that communities do not want.

And if he can't do it legally and acts illegally then by all means have at him - but he's got to actually do something illegal first, and expressing his opinion and his intentions to oppose the planning and licencing applications (etc) is not illegal, and still not suppressing CFA's freedom of speech.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Dear Aloysius the Gaul,

You've got an interesting point there, and I'm afraid I was too indirect in explaining my other thought.

I wasn't thinking so much about sewage treatment plants, etc. But what if a Mayor says "I will block any business coming to my town if key management personnel are (pro-Muslim, pro-Gay, pro-Gun rights, pro-black, pro-Democrat, pro-union, and on and on and on)? I would really hope that would be totally unacceptable to you.

Your point about "ripeness" is a good one though. Chick-Fil-A, might have to wait until the Mayor does something, but they might (really slim chance) get an injunction, or a Civil Rights attorney from the Justice Department might be called in to referee. (Not this Justice Department though, what was I thinking?) But if the Mayor gives them one second of delay that he doesn't give to other companies, I think Chick-Fil-A might have a pretty good case.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by benrl


Wait.. you you really think corporations are people?
When people say that they are mocking Romney. Corporations are not people. People that think that are what is wrong with this country.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

People that think that are what is wrong with this country.

No whats wrong with this country is people who disagree with the rule of law, yet are unwilling to fight against it by using the systems in place to in act change.

I wont repost my links to find your senator and Rep but there in this thread if you look...

Find both, write a written letter demanding a change to the Constitution.

Its called an "amendment"

Thats what it takes to overrule this SCOTUS ruling.

Once you have written that letter and told them you want the Amendment to change the constitution so that Corporations aren't legally allowed to be considered people.

UNTIL YOU DO THAT, stuff the "im the problem with america" Talk.

I wrote my letters and sent them in to my reps DEMANDING they start the amendment process... Did you?

NO?

Than you are whats wrong with this country, people that complain with out backing that crap up with action.

Since people seem not to get this fact heres some primers to help






It sucks when a corporation can use their money as free speech, because they are people doesn't it...

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


You might want to look into a concept called Corporate Personhood.

Here's the wiki for you.

The Supreme Court ruled that the legal concept that a corporation may sue and be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. This doctrine in turn forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. The doctrine does not hold that corporations are "people" in the literal sense, nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens.

en.wikipedia.org...

Does it help any to think of corporations as units of society which have been granted some of the rights of personhood and so, in certain special circumstances they can be considered and treated as "people?"

I think that's a little closer to the idea of what corporations are. It's not really that they are people or aren't people, sometimes, for convenience, you can think of them as people and sometimes you can't.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


It appears that English may not be your first language, so to clarify and simplify, YES, he did wrong.

VERY wrong.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by charles1952

 

He's not banning it - he's trying to use legal means to discourage it from setting up.

I would expect any mayor of any town to do excactly the same for any activity that may be legal but that "we don't want around here" - and it happens all the time for various reasons - from brothels where those are legal to liquor outlets to sewage farms to all sorts of things that communities do not want.

And if he can't do it legally and acts illegally then by all means have at him - but he's got to actually do something illegal first, and expressing his opinion and his intentions to oppose the planning and licencing applications (etc) is not illegal, and still not suppressing CFA's freedom of speech.

Wait... WHAT?

You seriously think the mayor should be able to "discourage" all restaurants from his city? that's what we're talking here - ALL restaurants. If it's only Chik-Fil-A - but permits OTHER restaurants, then that would be discrimination...

OR

Maybe you believe that discrimination is OK?

Your examples - let's use the brothels - means that you believe it would be OK to "discourage" one specific brothel from a street full of brothels in Las Vegas not because the girls have some kind of cooties, but rather because the madame is a Wiccan, and they might not like "her kind" 'round them parts...

This letter is not stepping on anyone's freedom. Its basicly saying:

"I disgaree with your opposition to gay marriage, please be aware that you are considering moving your business to a place where we have worked hard to provide equal rights for all - Including the right for same sex marriage. Therefore, you wouldn't be welcomed to with open arms and you would kind of be ruining our parade if you showed up"


No where does he actually say "Im banning you from moving your business here" I think he's aware that he doesn't have the right to do that.

Though it serves this company right. Are you here to do politics or are you here to do business? Because its one or the other my friend.