Chicago Values

[Elvado]

Mayor Emanuel declares Chick Fila unwelcome in Chicago as not reflecting Chicago values while at the same time working with Louis Farrakhan.

That tells me all I need to know about Chicago values...

[quickplay]

I think it makes perfect sense.

Chicago values are against discrimination.

Rahm's values are to cynically meet/work with absolutely anyone on earth who you think will benefit you in some way.

[HoyaNyr320]

Jul 26, 2012 8:20:50 GMT -5 Elvado said:

Mayor Emanuel declares Chick Fila unwelcome in Chicago as not reflecting Chicago values while at the same time working with Louis Farrakhan.

That tells me all I need to know about Chicago values...

I see what you did there... classic strawman. Nice work.

[TC]

Elvado, are you defending Chik-Fil-A or just insincerely bashing on Emanuel?

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2012 9:07:47 GMT -5 HoyaNyr320 said:

Jul 26, 2012 8:20:50 GMT -5 Elvado said:

Mayor Emanuel declares Chick Fila unwelcome in Chicago as not reflecting Chicago values while at the same time working with Louis Farrakhan.

That tells me all I need to know about Chicago values...

I see what you did there... classic strawman. Nice work.

How is that a strawman argument?

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2012 9:19:58 GMT -5 TC said:

Elvado, are you defending Chik-Fil-A or just insincerely bashing on Emanuel?

How can you not love Chick-Fil-A? Mmmmm, spicy chicken sandwich, waffle fries and sweet tea.

[jgalt]

Chick-Fil-A is overrated- its hipster fastfood

[Elvado]

I absolutely believe in Chick Fila's chairman's right to his personal bigotry. I do not believe in a municipal authority's right to limit business opportunity based on thought or speech. If Chicago can show discriminatory business practices, go get them

Finally, no one who voluntarily works with Farrakhan has any business criticizing the thoughts or words of anyone else.

[TC]

Jul 26, 2012 10:13:42 GMT -5 Elvado said:

I absolutely believe in Chick Fila's chairman's right to his personal bigotry. I do not believe in a municipal authority's right to limit business opportunity based on thought or speech. If Chicago can show discriminatory business practices, go get them

a ) He didn't express personal bigotry, he expressed institutionalized support for discrimination. I fully agree that he should have the right to his own personal bigotry, but crap like what he said is why companies tag on those annoying disclaimers to emails you make from your work address.

b ) No one has limited anything yet in actuality, from what I've seen Menino and Emanuel just made a bunch of statements against discrimination, which I think is a good thing for municipal leaders.

[SFHoya99]

Jul 26, 2012 10:07:47 GMT -5 jgalt said:

Chick-Fil-A is overrated- its hipster fastfood

Yes, it is, and it's delicious.

I don't agree with the founders on Chik-Fil-A on gay marriage or I imagine a whole lot of other social issues.

But as long as they aren't discriminating or using company funds for something really reprehensible, I'm not going to change too many buying habits on politics.

No matter what you buy, odds are there are a wide range of political opinions and activism by the people who collectively made those.

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2012 10:07:47 GMT -5 jgalt said:

Chick-Fil-A is overrated- its hipster fastfood

Chick-Fil-A is hipster?

You want something that's overrated? In-N-Out.

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2012 10:30:36 GMT -5 TC said:

b ) No one has limited anything yet in actuality, from what I've seen Menino and Emanuel just made a bunch of statements against discrimination, which I think is a good thing for municipal leaders.

Except when Chick-Fil-A's application is denied by a municipal entity and city leaders are on record as saying the business should not be allowed in the city due to statement's made by its CEO. That would be grounds for a legal challenge.

[SFHoya99]

Jul 26, 2012 11:01:05 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jul 26, 2012 10:07:47 GMT -5 jgalt said:

Chick-Fil-A is overrated- its hipster fastfood

Chick-Fil-A is hipster?

You want something that's overrated? In-N-Out.

Overrated is always a ridiculous argument since it centers on perception of value and perception of public perception of value.

But it's delicious and the best fast food burger.

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2012 11:11:32 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Jul 26, 2012 11:01:05 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Chick-Fil-A is hipster?

You want something that's overrated? In-N-Out.

Overrated is always a ridiculous argument since it centers on perception of value and perception of public perception of value.

But it's delicious and the best fast food burger.

Except in this case, it's the perfect description. In-N-Out makes great burgers (and animal fries, mmmm). But some people act like it's manna from heaven and that competing burger joints (Five Guys, Shake Shack, etc.) are on the level of pink slime.

[Boz]

The only thing I will absolutely make a point to visit Chik-fil-A for is their peach milkshake.

If you have not had this, you are missing out.

Other than that...meh. It'll do in a pinch, but I'm not sure why it has such a cult following.

As for the political ramifications, no, sorry, there is no unlawful discrimination whatsoever in the company's employment, service or business practices. Mr. Cathy is free to state what his opinions are and select organization that his company supports. Sorry, but Chik-fil-A is not doing anything illegal, no one has shown any evidence of illegal activities in organizations it is supporting, and no one has ever been denied service or employment based on race, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, or any other category in violation of equal opportunity or civil rights laws.

And yes, people are free to not patronize Chik-fil-A if they disagree with the politics of Mr. Cathy or the organizations his company supports. Absolutely, 100%.

It is another matter altogether, and pretty troubling, when governments, at the municipal or any level, boycott or ban a business based on the charitable or other organizations that company supports or the opinions of its chairman.

People can choose whether or not to eat there. But the mayors of Boston and Chicago are way overstepping their bounds here, IMO.

On the other hand, I don't think they've done anything other than issue statements. I don't think they've taken any preventive action, have they?

I'm curious as to the opinions of any attorneys whether they have a legal leg to stand on here if Chik-fil-A ignored them and went ahead with plans to place franchises in those cities anyway. Sure the mayors can SAY the company is unwelcome, but can they really deny them access? I don't think they can and I think they'd lose big time if Chik-fil-A wanted to fight this. (I say this as a non-lawyer though, and there probably is some legal mechanism available.)

EDIT: Oops. Posted this before I saw that Emanuel's comments were in support of an effort to actually block the opening of a Chik-fil-A in Chicago. Now I have to go read what "aldermanic privilege" is. Sounds shadily Chicago-ish.

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2012 11:19:36 GMT -5 Boz said:

The only thing I will absolutely make a point to visit Chik-fil-A for is their peach milkshake.

If you have not had this, you are missing out.

Other than that...meh. It'll do in a pinch, but I'm not sure why it has such a cult following.

As for the political ramifications, no, sorry, there is no unlawful discrimination whatsoever in the company's employment, service or business practices. Mr. Cathy is free to state what his opinions are and select organization that his company supports. Sorry, but Chik-fil-A is not doing anything illegal, no one has shown any evidence of illegal activities in organizations it is supporting, and no one has ever been denied service or employment based on race, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, or any other category in violation of equal opportunity or civil rights laws.

And yes, people are free to not patronize Chik-fil-A if they disagree with the politics of Mr. Cathy or the organizations his company supports. Absolutely, 100%.

It is another matter altogether, and pretty troubling, when governments, at the municipal or any level, boycott or ban a business based on the charitable or other organizations that company supports or the opinions of its chairman.

People can choose whether or not to eat there. But the mayors of Boston and Chicago are way overstepping their bounds here, IMO.

On the other hand, I don't think they've done anything other than issue statements. I don't think they've taken any preventive action, have they?

I'm curious as to the opinions of any attorneys whether they have a legal leg to stand on here if Chik-fil-A ignored them and went ahead with plans to place franchises in those cities anyway. Sure the mayors can SAY the company is unwelcome, but can they really deny them access? I don't think they can and I think they'd lose big time if Chik-fil-A wanted to fight this. (I say this as a non-lawyer though, and there probably is some legal mechanism available.)

EDIT: Oops. Posted this before I saw that Emanuel's comments were in support of an effort to actually block the opening of a Chik-fil-A in Chicago. Now I have to go read what "aldermanic privilege" is. Sounds shadily Chicago-ish.

All I know is Kelsey Grammer wouldn't block Chick-Fil-A.

[SFHoya99]

Jul 26, 2012 11:18:48 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jul 26, 2012 11:11:32 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Overrated is always a ridiculous argument since it centers on perception of value and perception of public perception of value.

But it's delicious and the best fast food burger.

Except in this case, it's the perfect description. In-N-Out makes great burgers (and animal fries, mmmm). But some people act like it's manna from heaven and that competing burger joints (Five Guys, Shake Shack, etc.) are on the level of pink slime.

I think In-n-Out > Five Guys, but Five Guys is damn good as well.

Where's Shake Shack?

[hoya9797]

Jul 26, 2012 11:19:36 GMT -5 Boz said:

The only thing I will absolutely make a point to visit Chik-fil-A for is their peach milkshake.

If you have not had this, you are missing out.

Other than that...meh. It'll do in a pinch, but I'm not sure why it has such a cult following.

As for the political ramifications, no, sorry, there is no unlawful discrimination whatsoever in the company's employment, service or business practices. Mr. Cathy is free to state what his opinions are and select organization that his company supports. Sorry, but Chik-fil-A is not doing anything illegal, no one has shown any evidence of illegal activities in organizations it is supporting, and no one has ever been denied service or employment based on race, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, or any other category in violation of equal opportunity or civil rights laws.

And yes, people are free to not patronize Chik-fil-A if they disagree with the politics of Mr. Cathy or the organizations his company supports. Absolutely, 100%.

It is another matter altogether, and pretty troubling, when governments, at the municipal or any level, boycott or ban a business based on the charitable or other organizations that company supports or the opinions of its chairman.

People can choose whether or not to eat there. But the mayors of Boston and Chicago are way overstepping their bounds here, IMO.

On the other hand, I don't think they've done anything other than issue statements. I don't think they've taken any preventive action, have they?

I'm curious as to the opinions of any attorneys whether they have a legal leg to stand on here if Chik-fil-A ignored them and went ahead with plans to place franchises in those cities anyway. Sure the mayors can SAY the company is unwelcome, but can they really deny them access? I don't think they can and I think they'd lose big time if Chik-fil-A wanted to fight this. (I say this as a non-lawyer though, and there probably is some legal mechanism available.)

EDIT: Oops. Posted this before I saw that Emanuel's comments were in support of an effort to actually block the opening of a Chik-fil-A in Chicago. Now I have to go read what "aldermanic privilege" is. Sounds shadily Chicago-ish.

The alderman has pretty much final say over what happens in his ward. If he had refused to issue Chick-fil-A a permit without mentioning this gay rights thing, I doubt many would have noticed or cared. But, it might be harder for him to refuse them now that he's made this an issue. The ironic thing is that most of the people in his ward is first or second generation Hispanic so they are likely more in line with Chick-fil-A on this issue. If he decides to hold the small business owners in his ward to the same standard he's holding Chick-fil-A, there will be a lot of empty storefronts.

[Problem of Dog]

Chik-Fil-A is delicious and there aren't any stand alone ones in DC. It's a damn shame.

The chairman is also a bigot, but Elvado is too, and that doesn't mean they don't have a right to free speech. If he said that Chik-Fil-A, the entity, also subscribed to his bigoted opinions, then I guess there would be a problem there.

It's still delicious.

[Elvado]

Wow. I have been called a bigot by problem of dog. Do I worry, ignore or rejoice when I consider the source? What to do?