Chick-fil-A to be denied zoning permit in Chicago

[waitasec]

Originally Posted by 4consideration

I don't think that is accurate.

From what I have been able to find on this isuue (mostly by following the link that Mystic posted, then following links with the article) it appears that the FNC did not oppose the legislation -- but did lobby for altering the wording of the legislation as it was going through the process -- as Mystic indicted.

Calling them "murderous" would not apply.

are you saying the uganda government instituting the death penalty for homosexuals is false?

[Wirey]

Originally Posted by waitasec

are you saying the uganda government instituting the death penalty for homosexuals is false?

How do you prove someone's a homosexual? Maybe they're just easily tricked.

[4consideration]

Originally Posted by waitasec

are you saying the uganda government instituting the death penalty for homosexuals is false?

No. Perhaps we have a misunderstanding here.

Did you mean "so they are basically murderous homophobes" to apply to Uganda?

I did not get that from your post. If you meant Uganda, then I misunderstood you.

Originally Posted by waitasec

so they are basically murderous homophobes

Originally Posted by waitasec

this food chain establishment is looking tastier and tastier

(I'm experiencing some type of glitchy thing with the quote feature right now. It won't take may correction to put it together, as posted.)

Since Mystic's post (that you were replying to) was about Chick-Fil-A and their contributions to FNC, and the FNC's lobbying to alter the wording of the resolution against Uganda's actions, and since you mentioned the food chain establishment -- I took it that you were referring to either FNC or Chick-Fil-A, or both.

If you were referring to either FNC or Chick-Fil-A (as I read your response to be) then I was stating that associating either organization with supporting acts of murder (or physical violence) against homosexuals is inaccurate. FNC clearly is opposed to legalization of gay marriage, but I have seen nothing to indicate that they actually support any type of violence against homosexuals. I have found (on their website today) actual wording that they do not support such things.

For the sake of clarity, who is the "they" in: "so they are basically murderous homophobes"? Uganda alone? And not FNC and/or Chick-Fil-A?

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by Chisti

The KKK asks you the same question. What will you tell them?

Are you going to answer the question or are you going to avoid answering by asking a question?

It is considered rude to reply to questions asked by not answering the question and asking another question instead...

[waitasec]

Originally Posted by 4consideration

No. Perhaps we have a misunderstanding here.

Did you mean "so they are basically murderous homophobes" to apply to Uganda?

I did not get that from your post. If you meant Uganda, then I misunderstood you.

(I'm experiencing some type of glitchy thing with the quote feature right now. It won't take may correction to put it together, as posted.)

Since Mystic's post (that you were replying to) was about Chick-Fil-A and their contributions to FNC, and the FNC's lobbying to alter the wording of the resolution against Uganda's actions, and since you mentioned the food chain establishment -- I took it that you were referring to either FNC or Chick-Fil-A, or both.

If you were referring to either FNC or Chick-Fil-A (as I read your response to be) then I was stating that associating either organization with supporting acts of murder (or physical violence) against homosexuals is inaccurate. FNC clearly is opposed to legalization of gay marriage, but I have seen nothing to indicate that they actually support any type of violence against homosexuals. I have found (on their website today) actual wording that they do not support such things.

For the sake of clarity, who is the "they" in: "so they are basically murderous homophobes"? Uganda alone? And not FNC and/or Chick-Fil-A?

ok, you are right. i think i got it now...
thank you.

[4consideration]

Originally Posted by waitasec

ok, you are right. i think i got it now...
thank you.

We're cool!

[Father Heathen]

Originally Posted by Chisti

The KKK asks you the same question. What will you tell them?

If the KKK doesn't victimize or violate the rights of innocent people, then there is no reason why they shouldn't have a right to assemble or express their opinions.

Sure, their views and beliefs are irrational and repugnant, but resorting to censorship and oppression is far more so.

[Apex]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

I quit my job over an ethical dispute with my manager the other day. What do you think my answer is going to be?

But let me flip the question around and give you one to answer yourself: do you think that people are ethically obligated to give Chick-fil-A their business?

If your answer is "no", then why would there be a problem in choosing not to give them business?

I did not mean simply choosing not to eat there. I was referring to holding organized protests/boycotts in front of specific franchise locations when no one at that location has done anything wrong.

[Apex]

Originally Posted by Father Heathen

Let's say that there was a restaurant chain that was openly anti-Mormon, and that donates large portions of its profits towards organizations that spread misinformation about Mormonism. Would you attempt to discourage your fellow Mormons from boycotting the restaurant chain? There will always be a demand for fast food. It's simply being redirected elsewhere, thus job opportunities will arise elsewhere.

I would not organize a specific effort to discourage others from eating there. I would just not eat there myself.

[waitasec]

Originally Posted by Apex

I would not organize a specific effort to discourage others from eating there. I would just not eat there myself.

agreed...