Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 8 years ago

was it free speech that drove everyone to Chik Fil A or opposition to LGBT rights that everyone was proud of?

when future generations look back will they see pictures of you supporting suppression of alternative lifestyles and their right to pursue what makes them happy?

Update:

or maybe i got it backwards and you all went there to show your love for everyone no matter who they want to marry.

21 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    All those cons were proud of this:

    1) Chick-fil-A has donated at least $5 million to organizations (including a certified hate group) that, among other things, depict gay people as pedophiles, want to make "gay behavior" illegal, and even say gay people should be "exported" out of America.

    Even if you oppose same-sex marriage, do you really want to support a company that advocates putting gay people in jail, or "exporting" them, just because they're gay?

    2) Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy didn't merely say he supports traditional marriage. Dan Cathy said if you support gay marriage, you "are inviting God's judgment on our nation," and that we "shake our fist at Him" when we do. Dan Cathy also said same-sex marriage is the result of a "deprived" mind and called it "twisted up kind of stuff."

    Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you really think gay marriage is "inviting God's judgment on our nation"? Haven't we all heard enough blame from those who claim to speak for the Lord, like after Katrina or, more recently, after the shooting in Aurora, Colo.?

    3) Chick-fil-A supports organizations that have claimed they can change gay people into straight people -- "pray away the gay" -- despite the fact that practically every major medical organization has stated that this is not only impossible but dangerous and harmful.

    Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you support fake "science" that is known to harm the very people it claims to help?

    4) The media keep saying Chick-fil-A has never discriminated, but the truth is that Chick-fil-A has been sued over a dozen times for employment discrimination. That's what a leading business publication, Forbes, stated in 2007, when they also called Chick-fil-A a "cult" and reported that Chick-fil-A's founder and CEO Truett Cathy said he wanted to hire married people because they are more industrious and productive. Truett Cathy has also said he would probably fire someone who "has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members."

    Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you want to support what some call a "cult" whose CEO says he would fire employees for "being sinful"?

    5) Chick-fil-A is just exercising their First Amendment rights by running a business based on the Bible, right? Wrong. There's a line between the "free exercise of religion" and violating the law. If Chick-fil-A is violating the law by discriminating against gay people, or by firing women so that they can be "stay home" moms, as one woman who is suing Chick-fil-A says in court documents, that's not exercising religious expression or free speech, and that's not a First Amendment issue. It may be, if the court decides, a violation of the law.

    Even if you don't support same-sex marriage, do you want to support a company that might fire women to force them to be "stay home" moms against their will?

    There are plenty of good restaurants that are happy to work hard for your hard-earned dollar. Why support a company that is working so hard to deny people their rights?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-badash/chick-f...

    ##

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • gyalog
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Hello Phoenix, Good identify Phone fees are so steeply-priced on the grounds that just like the leisure of the science we use day-to-day they're vastly overestimated. Once a cell mobilephone is produced in a international manufacturing unit the price to the manufacture from then on is minimum and the earnings, if the mobilephone, or anything, is widespread, are enormous. The brands of widespread techno sweets ought to use snow shovels to scoop our cash into their piggy banks. And we are not able to get sufficient of it. When income of the today's goodie fall. The organization tweeks the product and relaunches it with a brand new identify, and so forth. Each new release has a brand new techno buzz phrase. Mobile telephones and computer systems, like any of our mass produced toys, price subsequent to not anything to make. Today, its all approximately cost paying purchasers on longer term contracts. The irony of this cynical view is that with out such profitable approaches, that are used correct around the board, our economies might grind to a halt. We are all had to maintain the ever growing quantity of plates spinning.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • 8 years ago

    Yes it was, and it was free speech that slapped him back in the face when sells began dropping and continuing to drop. We live in a country where the government doesn't work full time making sure everything runs on a specific plan... thats China, In America you have the free will to express what you will, however the government will not protect to you from the aftermath of the negative energy you put out.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • 8 years ago

    Neither one. Baptist churches in the US have pretended that they are persecuted for decades now. They have preachers in churches and on TV encouraging everyone to support this guy for not being afraid to speak out about his religious beliefs.

    I think he used his religion to sell chicken, but if his motives were as pure as he claims, I don't care. He can say what he wants--and politicians in Chicago and Boston can hate him if they want. Now if he wants to move into those cities he'll have to prove that his store isn't discriminating against gay people. I think it will actually work out well for everyone, but everyone will be really upset about it anyway.

    Why do all of these conservative idiots, (and if we change to a different freedom topic we could find a dozen equally idiotic liberals), think that free speech is a right that only belongs to the first and loudest speaker, and that no one has a right to speak back at them or make them face any consequences for their speech? Did Congress pass some Chick-fil-A law I'm not aware of? They didn't? So it sounds like all that happened was a lot of free speech.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Robert
    Lv 5
    8 years ago

    Eat at Chik Fil A and boycott Chicago, Boston, San Francisco and all other cities whose mayors are against free speech.

    These liberals are for free speech as long as you agree with them!

    All animals are created equal ------ but some are more equal than others.

    Why did these bastards not attack Barack Obama with the same vengence, who, until just a few weeks ago, had the same view????

    Is this part of the socialism/communism of Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel?

    Remember that a government that can do everything for you can do anything TO you - including taking away your free speech!!

    Bigot - person who says you can't come to my town if you don't agree with me.

    Hypocrite - person who calls for tolerance for his beliefs from others but is intolerant himself.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    It was a combination of both for me. By the way, I'm 18 years old and I went to Chick-fil-A yesterday with my girlfriend (who's 19) and her little brother (who's 12). Not everyone in the younger generation is as much of an idiot as you.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    It wasn't about free speech.

    Just like supporting Don Imus wasn't about free speech.

    I'm betting Chick-fil-a's corporate office wished that all it's "supporters" had just stayed home and not dragged the story out.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • 8 years ago

    Free Speech

    Ask to the ACLU

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Free speech.

    During a candidate forum on October 26, 2004, Obama was asked to elaborate on his views of gay marriage and said he believes "that marriage is between a man and a woman" and "I don't think marriage is a civil right"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XAVqrqr4j4

    Youtube thumbnail

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    A little of both but the normal people are getting sick an tired of the gays bitching an moaning all the time.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.