Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

DIA Blocks Chick-Fil-A restaurant because of bigotry

Page 6 of 7 [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

28 Aug 2015, 8:37 pm

Fugu wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
I'd just like to point out that I've never eaten at a chick-fil-a, not because of political views, but because there's not one within 200 miles of me. I feel fortunate, every review I've read intimates that the food there taste like ass and this is before the controversy over their beliefs started a few years back. Since the conversation is well outside the scope of the initial post I'd just like to know, is their food really that bad?


I've eaten at them before and consider them to be pretty much like any fast food. When I want a chicken sandwich, I'd much rather have a grilled chicken sandwich.

I'd take Chick-Fil-A any time over many of the fast food hamburger places, especially Burger King.
their franchisee process is significantly different from most other fast food chains: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140725 ... istian-way


There's nothing wrong with that.



Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

28 Aug 2015, 11:08 pm

eric76 wrote:
Fugu wrote:
their franchisee process is significantly different from most other fast food chains: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140725 ... istian-way


There's nothing wrong with that.


Interestingly, it *is* illegal to base restricting franchise agreements on race, but not sex. Yet.


_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan


Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

31 Aug 2015, 3:39 pm

eric76 wrote:
Fugu wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
I'd just like to point out that I've never eaten at a chick-fil-a, not because of political views, but because there's not one within 200 miles of me. I feel fortunate, every review I've read intimates that the food there taste like ass and this is before the controversy over their beliefs started a few years back. Since the conversation is well outside the scope of the initial post I'd just like to know, is their food really that bad?


I've eaten at them before and consider them to be pretty much like any fast food. When I want a chicken sandwich, I'd much rather have a grilled chicken sandwich.

I'd take Chick-Fil-A any time over many of the fast food hamburger places, especially Burger King.
their franchisee process is significantly different from most other fast food chains: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140725 ... istian-way


There's nothing wrong with that.
considering their founder is anti-gay marriage and requires franchisees to be married, it's pretty telling and while not illegal, very disgusting ;/



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

31 Aug 2015, 4:25 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
cberg wrote:
How about we ignore the law in their case, instead nixing CFA because their food's questionable, as well as the fact that they're abrasive and stupid? Don't they know they would sell more chicken if they kept the puritanism to themselves?


They seem to be doing quite well for themselves, their sales have exploded over the last couple years. Chick-fil-A is apparenty the most profitable per restaurant than any other fast food place and will likely continue to expand probably at the fastest pace in the industry. People don't care about twitter activists, it causes more backlash than anything.


That's because it's become the political in-thing for the anti-LGBT rights crowd to eat there.


Exactly why the DIA doesn't want it there....Colorado has quite the large LGBT community so yeah the last thing the airport wants to do is make that portion of the population uncomfortable when they go to use the airport. And hell as I mentioned earlier they have lots of other locations already and billboards plastered all over the place...they don't need nor are they entitled to a location in the airport.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

31 Aug 2015, 4:31 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
^ridiculous. And just to clarify nowhere did I ever say 'thought crimes' should be punished that's ridiculous. I said verbal harrassment/abuse should have consequences and it shouldn't get special protections just because someone claims their religion makes them right. But this is kind of off topic anyways there is no punishment of thought crimes going on here...its not a punishment that they aren't going to be able to put up a franchise in the airport. If chick fil a feels that is unjust they can sue.

Agreeing with harassment being illegal isn't the same thing as wanting 'thought crimes' punished...honestly I don't even agree with the concept of thought crimes, I'd never suggest 'thinking' be a crime so quit accusing me of that.


Then what on earth was-

Quote:
Also even if someone had good lawyers there are limits to what is covered by 'free speech' on government owned ground. Pretty sure going to say some political speech by a politician on government property of some minority and you start screaming racial slurs and being disruptive....well no that is not going to be allowed.


-all about?

The only possible way this could be remotely relevant to the discussion is in a hypothetical future scenario in which you predict an occurrence of racial antagonism. Otherwise, I have literally no idea why you're bringing it up.


Well I lost you a while ago....harassment isn't a thought crime, in saying i think harrassment should be penalized legally I am not supporting penalizing 'thought crimes.' Now back to the topic of the thread...DIA doesn't have to allow chick-fil-hell to open a location there...there is no crime being punished' to begin with I don't even know how the discussion went to that.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

31 Aug 2015, 4:41 pm

eric76 wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
I don't eat at Chik-Fil-A because their food is N-A-S-T-Y.


I don't eat there because the nearest is a 200 mile round trip. If I'm driving 100 miles to eat and 100 miles back, I'm looking for something besides fast food.

Quote:
In any case, the government meddling in business based on moral beliefs is a tad troubling, however.
More than a tad troubling.


I suppose its not disturbing when the government creates laws based on religious beliefs though...like some of the current republican candidates that want to undo the legalization of gay marriage as soon as they get into office because of 'the sanctity of marriage'? stuff like that isn't disturbing certainly not.

Also the constitution doesn't say the government cannot meddle for moral reasons it says 'the government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.' Plenty of laws and regulations are based on general universal morals. For instance it is illegal to murder, rape, harrass, steal, abuse children, abuse animals all because generally people see these things as wrong which means...morality.... 8O

Also DIA turning down chick fil a, doesn't violate any freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of their religion, they are perfectly within their rights to hold the views they do and even express them....that does not extend their business being entitled to open a franchise wherever it wants regardless of how the community and/or property owners feel about it.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

31 Aug 2015, 4:44 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
I'd just like to point out that I've never eaten at a chick-fil-a, not because of political views, but because there's not one within 200 miles of me. I feel fortunate, every review I've read intimates that the food there taste like ass and this is before the controversy over their beliefs started a few years back. Since the conversation is well outside the scope of the initial post I'd just like to know, is their food really that bad?


It's overpriced pathetic little servings of chicken that seems like its more air and breading than chicken, the condiments probably have more food value than the crap. Also they have their stupid theme of 'eat chicken to save cows' this has always disturbed me to be honest.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

31 Aug 2015, 4:54 pm

Jacoby wrote:
If you can discriminate against a business because of religion then you can discriminate because of race or sexuality or anything. It doesn't matter what the religious beliefs of Chick-fil-A's corporate structure are if it in no way effects their business. Saudi Arabia beheads homosexuals in public squares and we're talking about chicken sandwiches, this stupid non-thinking twitter activism has to stop. I think this is another example of do gooder liberal guilt giving way to totalitarian thought police. You don't have to like each other, just because you buy a product doesn't mean you whole heartedly agree with all the views and actions of everybody involved in the chain of that one transaction. Who cares? It's such a weird thing to stick your flag in the ground for, most of the stuff we buy every day is made by slave labor in China but we need to boycott Chick-fil-A because their 90 year old founder didn't support gay marriage? Remember Obama didn't until the very end of his first term.

If you want to make a libertarian property rights type argument then you would also have to believe that private businesses should be able to discriminate for any reason as it is their money and property but I don't think any of you will make that leap. You just want your views and your morals enforced, I live and let live.

I've never eaten at Chick-fil-A, I don't eat fast food often and there is a about 15 other places I'd eat at before settling for Chick-fil-A. The nonly person that I've ever known to like it is a lesbian ironically enough, she apparently wasn't bothered by it. Some people get offended by the hidden scripture and stuff but In-N-Out does that too and they're the GOAT.


I don't see where you are getting that people support totalitarianism and thought police, because an airport is simply not allowing a company to open another location there...but whatever.

And no one has said the DIA should be able to 'discriminate for any reason' so no one does not have to support businesses discriminating for whatever reason they want... You seem to think the reason is 'because they're Christians' which as far as I can tell its not. It is more complicated than that and really it has nothing to do with them being christian....If the CEO didn't want to cause political controversy he should have stuck to business instead of making a point to complain about gay rights.

Not to mention its a given they certainly discriminate on the basis of religion and sexual orientation in their hiring practices...they've just made it so there is really no benefit to opening a chick fil at DIA. More trouble than its worth and there were other applicants to.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

31 Aug 2015, 5:27 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Also they have their stupid theme of 'eat chicken to save cows' this has always disturbed me to be honest.
taking marketing seriously is a fool's errand.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

31 Aug 2015, 7:17 pm

Fugu wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Also they have their stupid theme of 'eat chicken to save cows' this has always disturbed me to be honest.
taking marketing seriously is a fool's errand.


*shrug* I can use any reason that catches my fancy to decide to buy or not buy any product or service.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

31 Aug 2015, 9:40 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
It's overpriced pathetic little servings of chicken that seems like its more air and breading than chicken, the condiments probably have more food value than the crap.


That describes just about any fast food, doesn't it?



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

31 Aug 2015, 9:46 pm

I dunno. Compared to much better chicken sandwiches sold by other fast food restaurants, chick-fil-a is kinda cheap.

I'd rather eat greasy sawdust for the money, tho.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

31 Aug 2015, 9:51 pm

at least they were right to block a business operating within their purview who refuses to be open the same hours as the common air traffic which is, of course, 7 days per week.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Sep 2015, 2:03 am

eric76 wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
It's overpriced pathetic little servings of chicken that seems like its more air and breading than chicken, the condiments probably have more food value than the crap.


That describes just about any fast food, doesn't it?


Somewhat, but I know chick fil a is rather expensive for fast food....and the portions you pay for seem lacking only went there once a while back and certainly have no interest of ever going again. That said I don't eat much fast food. I know fast food franchises make lots of $$$$ so I really cannot be bothered to feel sorry for a fast food place because they didn't get chosen off the list of multiple applicants to install a franchise at the airport.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,286
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Sep 2015, 2:05 am

Fugu wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Also they have their stupid theme of 'eat chicken to save cows' this has always disturbed me to be honest.
taking marketing seriously is a fool's errand.



I don't have to take it seriously to find it disturbing and unappealing...I could try and explain exactly why but its kinda complicated.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

01 Sep 2015, 2:05 am

another example of a right-wing business preying on low-information voters, overcharging them for unhealthy food, profiting from their petty hatreds, IOW it has become a values statement for many right wingers, to be seen patronizing that establishment, just as it has for the same group being seen watching faux news.