Conservative mayor blocks Home Depot over homosexual support

[RoBoTeq]

Robo, I don't know what you are talking about. I have never fit that discription. No one ever took care of me unless you count my stint in the Air Force. If anyone really wants to feel abandoned in the USA try starting your own business. I did.
If by FDR's "Socialist programs" you mean our SS annuity try seeing our country with out it. It is a great investment for many and maybe you might live long enough to appreciate the idea. It's no entitlement as the nut jobs would like you to believe. It's our money held in trust. Tell the right wing politicians to leave it alone. Money is being spent to convince Americans to abandon SS in favor of something else. That's like shaking the hangman's hand.
Maybe your more comfortable with a system that says "Your on your own. Tuck & roll. See if your family can afford to put an addition on their house for you when your money evaporates. Then you will really grasp the idea of helplessness.
As far as your ridiculous statement about what you call "Socialist programs that can't work as long as we are still a capitalist country" Guess what. WE AREN"T IN A CAPITALIST COUNTRY. And guess again, SS does work and works great. Americans aren't capitalists even if they think they are. We might have a quasi capitalist economy but we live in a democratic republic. The nature of true capitalism is exploitation and I think few here would put up with it. I'm glad there are not more of the Romneys out there. There is much about the USA that is great but the attitudes that have been jammed into many heads (by capitalists in fact) about the righteousness of capitalism only favor guess who, the capitalists. Our country was built on the exploits of business and labor. guess who was exploited.
Many here are young enough to see themselves as survivors and bullet proof, not needing such things as SS Medicare Etc. You should know by now that time changes everything.

OK, it was unfair to state that all leftists remain unweaned, even if they do still believe in a nanny state. So, since I don't know if you work strictly private sector with no government input, I apologize for that commentary. The rest of your post, you are very wrong about.

There is not one government program that has not caused us to be financially burdened. We need to greatly reduce the size of government to where we have some control of it.

[RoBoTeq]

It might seem counter-intuitive but no, a business open to the public isn't private. At least as far as goods and services go. The courts determined that 45 years ago or so when the restaurants refused to serve Blacks. One guy even chased people out of his restaurant with an axe handle.
Like I said about the sign that reserves the right to refuse service won't work anymore. (unless it's a no-naked policy)
To have laws regarding discrimination being unlawful doesn't fit a socialist agenda it closer to a Christian agenda.

Again, you are wrong minded about this issue. Chik Fil A breaks no laws with their stand about homosexuallity. The idiot mayor of Boston must have been chastized for his stupid comments because even he is severely back peddling, saying that he does not the right to do the things that you are now claiming he does have the right to do.

[RoBoTeq]

Now, here's an opinion about this Chik Fil A contraversy I can really respect; http://www.youtube.com/embed/LUmoTOu...layer_embedded

You tell it, girlfriend!

[corny]

Now, here's an opinion about this Chik Fil A contraversy I can really respect; http://www.youtube.com/embed/LUmoTOu...layer_embedded

You tell it, girlfriend!

Guess my chik fil a eating days are over.

[RoBoTeq]

Guess my chik fil a eating days are over.

Why? You can't hang with the homosexual rapper who is honest about the way things are?

[hvacker]

Again, you are wrong minded about this issue. Chik Fil A breaks no laws with their stand about homosexuallity. The idiot mayor of Boston must have been chastized for his stupid comments because even he is severely back peddling, saying that he does not the right to do the things that you are now claiming he does have the right to do.

This Chic position might well be decided in court because it pushes the idea of discrimination. Can a formal business policy be considered illegal if it even verbally singles out one group? Does the policy establish an attitude about employees serving patrons or toward employees.
Forty-five years ago the idea that an owner had to serve anyone that came in seemed absurd.
I'm not claiming the Mayor has any rights and he might not know law. I'm thinking it was more political. But I also think he opened a can of worms as far as interpreting what discrimination might mean. We'll wait and see.

[hvacker]

OK, it was unfair to state that all leftists remain unweaned, even if they do still believe in a nanny state. So, since I don't know if you work strictly private sector with no government input, I apologize for that commentary. The rest of your post, you are very wrong about.

There is not one government program that has not caused us to be financially burdened. We need to greatly reduce the size of government to where we have some control of it.

It would take a pure knucklehead to be comfortable with gov spending today. But we can still pick and choose what we want for our people. SS I believe is one of the best that's been done. The grant for the studying of violin finishes, not so much.
We build a giant military not so much out of need to protect Americans but to protect business investment. Today there are tax dollars spent for employees of US Dept of Commerce/Patent & Trademark Office, in China today, enforcing Apple's patents and Apple pays no taxes on their business there.
Most unnecessary gov spending begins in Congress and they aren't about to quit yet. People that have dealt with government contracts learn early that most all agencies need to spend all their allotted money or next year they will get less. Like pigs at the trough.

[RoBoTeq]

This Chic position might well be decided in court because it pushes the idea of discrimination. Can a formal business policy be considered illegal if it even verbally singles out one group? Does the policy establish an attitude about employees serving patrons or toward employees.
Forty-five years ago the idea that an owner had to serve anyone that came in seemed absurd.
I'm not claiming the Mayor has any rights and he might not know law. I'm thinking it was more political. But I also think he opened a can of worms as far as interpreting what discrimination might mean. We'll wait and see.

Why? What do you believe to be illegal here? Freedom of speech? There is no discrimination going on. This rapper guy Antoine just might wind up becoming Chik Fil A's unauthorized spokesperson.

I know that people like you want to have everyone controlled to your liking by government, but tough....we're not gonna take it!

[hvacker]

Why? What do you believe to be illegal here? Freedom of speech? There is no discrimination going on. This rapper guy Antoine just might wind up becoming Chik Fil A's unauthorized spokesperson.

I know that people like you want to have everyone controlled to your liking by government, but tough....we're not gonna take it!

No and NO! I don't want the government controlling much of anything in this regard but I know they will try. I thought this post was about speculation of where this chic thing will end up. My speculation, not my will. I'm still back in the day where I run my business my way, but I see that changing.
What I, and people like me believe, is the right to be left alone.
When I said before, "wait and see" is see what happens if someone finds a legal way to find this business guilty of discrimination.
I mentioned last week about a photographer who wouldn't take pictures of a gay couple and lost in court. Today a child was not allowed in a Christian PK because the parents were gay. This is happening across the country.
Finding out now that the people that own the Chic franchises are pi$$. It's said they put up with being closed on Sundays but this gay thing will cost them even more. They knew about the Sunday thing but didn't expect this position statement.
There's another possible legal issue. Did the CEO's position hurt their business?
Again SPECULATION!

[RoBoTeq]

No and NO! I don't want the government controlling much of anything in this regard but I know they will try. I thought this post was about speculation of where this chic thing will end up. My speculation, not my will. I'm still back in the day where I run my business my way, but I see that changing.
What I, and people like me believe, is the right to be left alone.
When I said before, "wait and see" is see what happens if someone finds a legal way to find this business guilty of discrimination.
I mentioned last week about a photographer who wouldn't take pictures of a gay couple and lost in court. Today a child was not allowed in a Christian PK because the parents were gay. This is happening across the country.
Finding out now that the people that own the Chic franchises are pi$$. It's said they put up with being closed on Sundays but this gay thing will cost them even more. They knew about the Sunday thing but didn't expect this position statement.
There's another possible legal issue. Did the CEO's position hurt their business?
Again SPECULATION!

Those incidences you have cited are very plainly discriminatory actions that there are laws against. Nothing that Chik Fil A has done or said is illegal in any way. Even the ACLU has stated that Chik Fil A has done nothing illegal and that these fascist politicians have no right to take actions to stop Chik Fil A from doing business in their areas of the country. The good people of Boston and Chicago should not be denied their right to choose who they want to do business with.

What is really insane here is that the CEO of Chik Fil A never actually made any of the statements that have caused this ruckus. Cathy never made any negative comments about homosexuals, only positive comments about bible based family values. It was the journalists who turned what Chik Fil A supports into a claim that Chik Fil A is against homosexuals. While it does seem to be an implied conclusion, it is like saying that Obama is anti heterosexual because he has come out as being pro homosexual marriage.

This extremist media reporting, and both leftists and too far to the right concervatives are gulty of this, are reporting their "assumptions" rather than an accurate version of what is actually being said by people they are reporting on.

It is getting so bad that we can expect to hear that Obama is opposed to chocolate ice cream because he said he prefers vanilla or that Romney is racist because he has no Black children. It is just out of hand the way the extremists are dividing Americans on every possilble issue.

[hearthman]

Our Leftist media has done a pretty good job of lying about the facts in this 'case' as if it should even be discussed publicly because it is a non-issue invented by the media and their liberal masters.

Any owner of any company has the right to his own beliefs. If he chooses to make those beliefs public, such as I have here on the H-Talk ARP, then big deal but it should not affect my business and there is no legal basis for a governing agency or politician to say or do anything about it. If he does, it is I who then has a legal right to clobber his sorry butt in the media and if necessary in court.

Chick- Fil-A as a company has no such position against ANY group. They hire gays, they serve gays. This is a non-issue once again just like the supposed Republican "war on women" BS.

BTW, I've been through the CFlA drive thru daily for the last three days and these are the longest lines I've seen yet so there are plenty of people who don't buy into this phony controversy. The only controversy is how to get rid of all the national media.

Save the planet-eat chicken!

[RoBoTeq]

I have no doubt that the leftist media's intent with this has backfired on them by just giving Chik Fil A a lot of free advertizing as well as support that would not have been there had these whiny leftist liars tried to cause trouble again.

Personally, I'll be eating more Chik Fil A food and not supporting anything pertaining to Disney or Jim Henson affiliated companies.

Homosexuals have forced Americans to take sides.

[newoldtech]

This extremist media reporting, and both leftists and too far to the right concervatives are gulty of this, are reporting their "assumptions" rather than an accurate version of what is actually being said by people they are reporting on.

Then why make a big deal out of any of it? If you like the chicken at chik fila, eat it. If Home Depot has a good sale on widgets then buy em. Most companies that try and seem friendly to any particular group are doing it mostly in an attempt to increase profits. I highly doubt they really could care less otherwise. Unless they are doing something overtly offensive, I say who cares? I just buy what I like and leave the finger pointing to as you say the extremists.

I have no doubt that the leftist media's intent with this has backfired on them by just giving Chik Fil A a lot of free advertizing as well as support that would not have been there had these whiny leftist liars tried to cause trouble again.

Personally, I'll be eating more Chik Fil A food and not supporting anything pertaining to Disney or Jim Henson affiliated companies.

Homosexuals have forced Americans to take sides.

I bet more homosexuals eat at Chik Fila than care about the politics of it all.