Freedom of Speech

[soberups]

And THAT I wholeheartedly agree with. It's the first thought that came into my mind when our GOVERNMENT (several mayors) decided to tell Chick-Fil-A not to build in "their" cities.
Let Chick-Fil-A build wherever they want. The people will decide with their pocketbooks whether the restaurant survives. (And I bet Chick-Fil-A will do just fine)

The mayors of those cities are entitled to their own opinion. The reality is that siting a business is typically a matter of zoning and enviornmental regulations. A mayor does not *usually* have the power to arbitrarily deny a business license based upon personal whims, and I would be in opposition to such a mayor even if I agreed with him on his reasons.

 

[over9five]

The mayors of those cities are entitled to their own opinion. The reality is that siting a business is typically a matter of zoning and enviornmental regulations. A mayor does not *usually* have the power to arbitrarily deny a business license based upon personal whims, and I would be in opposition to such a mayor even if I agreed with him on his reasons.

The mayor's of some of these cities stated "their" opinion on city letterheads. Do you agree with that?

 

[bbsam]

The mayor's of some of these cities stated "their" opinion on city letterheads. Do you agree with that?

Why not? Presidents give their opinions in signing statements using the presidential seal. Of course those are defacto laws.

 

[soberups]

The mayor's of some of these cities stated "their" opinion on city letterheads. Do you agree with that?

No, and if you want to get technical about it, I suppose the mayors should reimburse the city for the cost of the stationary that they used.

If the residents of the city do not want the mayor speaking on their behalf in such a manner, they are free to vote him out of office at the next election. Otherwise, as a public figure he is entitled to say whatever he wants.

I agree with you that the city should not be allowed to deny Chick Fil A the right to open a franchise based solely upon the fact that the owner is a bigot.

 

[over9five]

I agree with you that the city should not be allowed to deny Chick Fil A the right to open a franchise based solely upon the fact that the owner is a bigot.

He's only a bigot in your mind. Certainly not in the minds of the hundreds of thousands that flooded his restaurants the other day. To most people, he's only defending his interpretation of marriage. I haven't heard him call any of you names for your beliefs, but you sure heap the hate on him!

And I'll be honest with you. First, everyone here knows I'm not religious.
Second, I used to be a bigtime gay-hater. But like my President, my views have evolved. Now I simply don't care. If gays want to get married, I'm good with that. Let them call it marriage, and change the tax laws to reflect that.
What bothers me about this whole thing is GOVERNMENT trying to run this guy out of town. Its' stupid! He employs thousands of people, we should welcome his business to open wherever they can.
And, as always (or at least how it should be), THE PEOPLE will decide whether that business lives or dies.

 

[soberups]

He's only a bigot in your mind. Certainly not in the minds of the hundreds of thousands that flooded his restaurants the other day. To most people, he's only defending his interpretation of marriage. I haven't heard him call any of you names for your beliefs, but you sure heap the hate on him!

And I'll be honest with you. First, everyone here knows I'm not religious.
Second, I used to be a bigtime gay-hater. But like my President, my views have evolved. Now I simply don't care. If gays want to get married, I'm good with that. Let them call it marriage, and change the tax laws to reflect that.
What bothers me about this whole thing is GOVERNMENT trying to run this guy out of town. Its' stupid! He employs thousands of people, we should welcome his business to open wherever they can.
And, as always (or at least how it should be), THE PEOPLE will decide whether that business lives or dies.

Agreed!

 

[bbsam]

So how long can Chik Flavr Fla milk this made up controversy? They may get a spike in sales, but long run I think it's detrimental. How many of the "supporters" couldn't even remember the last time they had enjoyed the Fla?

 

[Jones]

So how long can Chik Flavr Fla milk this made up controversy? They may get a spike in sales, but long run I think it's detrimental. How many of the "supporters" couldn't even remember the last time they had enjoyed the Fla?

I don't think Chick-Fil-A is trying to milk this, in fact I'm pretty sure they wish it would all just go away because they were already doing fine and as a business they really don't need the controversy. The forces on both sides who are making this into a big issue aren't affiliated with the company and have their own agendas. Long term I agree this will hurt Chick-Fil-A more than it will help and I think the owners know that as well.

 

[BrownArmy]

He's only a bigot in your mind. Certainly not in the minds of the hundreds of thousands that flooded his restaurants the other day. To most people, he's only defending his interpretation of marriage. I haven't heard him call any of you names for your beliefs, but you sure heap the hate on him!

Come on now, let's not beat around the bush, let's call things by their proper names.

This guy actually is a bigot:

[A person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance) ].

And really, hey, it's no problem!

He may have his own reasons (i.e. religion) for being a bigot, and he is certainly entitled to his own opinions, and his 1st amendment right to express those opinions.

But, by definition, he's a bigot. Words have meanings, let's use the correct ones.

(Insert 'inter-racial' instead of 'homosexual' in any of his comments about marriage and you'll know exactly what I mean).

Listen, if any of you have a problem with two people whom you've never met and know nothing about getting married, to me that says more about you than it does about them.

I know plenty of hetero couples that should have been denied the marriage permit...

 

[soberups]

But, by definition, he's a bigot. Words have meanings, let's use the correct ones.

(Insert 'inter-racial' instead of 'homosexual' in any of his comments about marriage and you'll know exactly what I mean)....

 

[upsgrunt]

If you feel this way, then there are lots of bigots on this forum.
There is a fine line between your definition, freedom of speech, and opinion.
Everybody is entitled to each.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

A bigot is someone who is intolerant of those with an opposing viewpoint, religious or personal belief. Simply disagreeing with someone or something does not make one a bigot--closed minded, yes, but not a bigot.

 

[Catatonic]

A bigot is someone who is intolerant of those with an opposing viewpoint, religious or personal belief. Simply disagreeing with someone or something does not make one a bigot--closed minded, yes, but not a bigot.

So,in other words, go over to Current Events if you want to see a bunch of bigots?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

So,in other words, go over to Current Events if you want to see a bunch of bigots?

Bigots? No. Closed-minded? A bit harsh--perhaps unable or unwilling to see things from another perspective would be more appropriate.

 

[Catatonic]

Bigots? No. Closed-minded? A bit harsh--perhaps unable or unwilling to see things from another perspective would be more appropriate.

Just using your defintion - A bigot is someone who is intolerant of those with an opposing viewpoint, religious or personal belief.

This is applicable to 90% of the posts in that forum, not that there is anything wrong with that.

It's almost impossible to have a rational coherent exchange of ideas in that forum.

The "Chick-fil-A" threads, definitely the exception, were doing much better than average until MFE put his 2 cents worth in.
​