DIA Blocks Chick-Fil-A restaurant because of bigotry

Post Reply New Topic

As an escaped mormon i was taught that everyone has a right to live according to the dictates of their own conscience.

That means that you are welcome to patronize or boycott any business you please, and so am i.

It also means that the CEO of chick-fil-a is welcome to decline all gay marriage proposals, but not welcome to tell other people not to marry whoever they wish to marry.

It perplexes me that most mormons cannot fathom that logic.

You can boycott, or not boycott, anyone you want. People who are Pro-LGBT rights boycott Chik-Fil-A, while people like Franklin Graham and Mike Hucksterby calls for their supporters to boycott any business that is not Anti-LGBT. That choice is the nature of the free market, isn't it?

who owns the airport?

Wow that is interesting, which Mormon community did you come from?

By "escaped" did you decide before baptism?

Not chick-fil-a, that is for sure....so they have no jurisdiction within the air-port if the owner/management says no to chick-fil-a that means no, they can go operate somewhere else.

I'd say that depends on how bad the cake is.

Yes but that is what I'm trying to find out. In London each of the airports are different companies, they compete with each other.

Is this airport owned by the council, is it some sort of quango?

Contrary to your belief people here in Denver are not exactly lining up to go to the airport to eat chick-fil-a...for one its way far out from the city so its a hassle to go there even if you need to catch a plane or pick someone up. There are plenty of restaurants/gift shops for people to choose from if they do have to go to the air-port. Chick-fil-a being denied a franchise in the airport is a non-issue, what having a location at every mall isn't good enough? Don't worry no one is going to be deprived of their convenient chick-fil-a location with this move by the airport. Also its not government intervention....its whoever runs the airport deciding not to allow a chick-fil-a franchise, pretty sure businesses have the right to apply for setting up a franchise in the airport....doesn't mean they are guaranteed to have it granted.

I don't know exactly if it is private or more government owned...would have too look that up. I guess it is ran by City & County of Denver Department of Aviation, so guess it sort of makes it public space....but businesses need permits and approval to operate in public space there is no guarantee a business gets to operate wherever it wants. But I guess I would be curious how exactly they came to the decision to ensure the denial of the chick fil a was not simply because the CEO is a christian as that would be illegal.

The city of Denver owns the airport, that's why the city council has final say on the businesses that are allowed to occupy it's retail space. Being Denver this action is probably supported by a significant amount of people there and thus non-controversial locally.

On a side note: living in the Colorado mountains, whenever I hear Denver my stomach gets sick. My extended family lives in the region and as a child I would visit every summer, that being said I hadn't been there in about a decade until last month. There's nothing like driving through the reasonably pristine wilderness of I-70 west of Golden, coming over the ridge, and then being greeted with an unfettered view of the blob of human industrialization called Denver. It's a grotesque enough site to turn even the most hardened of anti-environmentalists' stomachs. No personal offense to anyone that lives in the region, it just left a really unappealing mark on my psyche.

Do not presume to tell me what my beliefs are. Especially those I haven't expressed an opinion on one way or another. Contrary to your nonsensical conclusion, I don't give a crap how eager the citizens of Denver are to consume their products. I have no vested interest in such data.



Nothing you have said is relevant to either the situation or anything I've posted. If, as stated, the decision is being made by Denver City Council, the following is the single most important factor in this discussion:

The airport is owned by the City of Denver, the city council is effectively the "Board of Directors" of the location. This isn't a local government action against a private property owner, this is a property owner making a decision about their own property.

Provo.

And no, in my 20's.

11th article of faith is specifically about worship, but i don't see any way that doesn't extend to any entire system of belief or lack thereof and corresponding way of life.

"We claim the privilege of worshiping almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscence, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

The 13 articles if faith are not optional. In the LDS faith, you embrace and uphold all 13, or you're not right with God.

And yeah, the hipocracy was half the reason i dropped out. The other half was not actually believing 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10.

You mean these people Denver City Council?



Sounds like a local government to me.

Yep, it's a government agency and they also happen to be the legal property owner of said location. I mean, unless you're against property ownership and rights, what's the issue here?

You are the one who posted the hypothetical senerio about someone complaining about every restaurant but the one they want to go to being banned in response to a comment about there being many chick-fil-a in the denver area.



So seemed you thought the airport is a largely sought out location for eating fast food specifically chick-fil-a and not having one in the airport would cause your hypothetical of someone complaining about not being able to go to the restaurant they want becuase there isn't a chick-fil-a in the denver airport. Or did you mean something else, if so please explain.

If Denver City Council owns it, that they can deny a franchise the liscense/permission to operate on that property is very relevant....and that is what I have suggested. Whoever owns it gets final jurisdiction of what businesses are and aren't operating on the premise that is all stuff I have said so how none of what I've posted is 'relevant' beats me, you'd have to explain that one.

If their stated reason is bigotry on the part of the CEO and that they refuse certain insurance coverage to employees based on religious bigotry....then no it cannot be classified as religious discrimination, that would be if their reason is 'the CEO is a Christian' thus far it does not appear that is the reason their application to operate in the airport was denied.

Extreme example but what if a business owned by a CEO involved in the KKK wanted to create a franchise in the airport...would them being denied that licences be 'religious discrimination' because KKK members identify as white protestants? Or would it be the management of the airport making a decision based on not wanting to make its. patrons/customers uncomfortable? Much of the public is displeased by Chick fil a's display of intolerance...they aren't being disallowed for being 'christian' their being disallowed for being bad for airport business.

Last edited by Sweetleaf on 27 Aug 2015, 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.