University of Kansas closes all chic-fil-a's!

[zstampe]

Is Chik refusing service to gays? This is just one person stating that he and his family believes in traditional marriage as defined by his religion. Nothing more, nothing less. He did NOT say that gays are not welcomed in his restaurants. I need to look up the definition of bigotry.

Should divorced folks get pissed too since he said that he is fortunate that their families hang onto their first spouses????

Good points. Again my stance on this is be happy in life. I didn't intend for this to turn into a religious or political debate.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

 

[Thai]

Public, and I know where you're going with that as they may find themselves in a sticky situation. But they are standing up for what they believe is right.

My thought though is if chic fil a will fight it, because they might not want to be associated with the university knowing their stance on the situation.

KU won't have a fight with Chik...but rather with the local business owners who franchised Chik name.

 

[Thai]

Good points. Again my stance on this is be happy in life. I didn't intend for this to turn into a religious or political debate.

Bigotry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry, I don't see the connection of what he said to the term bigotry! Remember, Chik CEO said this in passing in an interview NOT about gays. He simply believes in traditional marriage. That's it! He said NO WHERE that he bans gays from his establishments!!!!!!

Where you and other liberals got the rest of the story from is mind boggling!

 

[zstampe]

Sorry, I don't see the connection of what he said to the term bigotry! Remember, Chik CEO said this in passing in an interview NOT about gays. He simply believes in traditional marriage. That's it! He said NO WHERE that he bans gays from his establishments!!!!!!

Where you and other liberals got the rest of the story from is mind boggling!

Funny thing is I never said once that I was liberal.

 

[zstampe]

KU won't have a fight with Chik...but rather with the local business owners who franchised Chik name.

Are they franchised or corp owned stores?

 

[IanB]

Public, and I know where you're going with that as they may find themselves in a sticky situation. But they are standing up for what they believe is right.

Who is "they"? The University is not a person, capable having an opinion on a topic, it is a publicly funded institution, ran by employees who are hired to do a job. Right or wrong, those employees are abusing their power in this scenario. This action is not representative of the people that pay to fund that institution, and a University of all things has no place being in the censorship business IMO.

 

[zstampe]

Who is "they"? The University is not a person, capable having an opinion on a topic, it is a publicly funded institution, ran by employees who are hired to do a job. Right or wrong, those employees are abusing their power in this scenario. This action is not representative of the people that pay to fund that institution, and a University of all things has no place being in the censorship business IMO.

I guess "they" would be the board in which decided this on the behalf of the university.

The university does have a right to determine who places business on their campus. Now if they can determine who these businesses are based on religious or other affiliations I'm not sure. I'm no civil rights lawyer.

 

[KidVermicious]

Who is "they"? The University is not a person, capable having an opinion on a topic, it is a publicly funded institution, ran by employees who are hired to do a job. Right or wrong, those employees are abusing their power in this scenario. This action is not representative of the people that pay to fund that institution, and a University of all things has no place being in the censorship business IMO.

Exactly right. Zstampe can talk about people being happy all he wants, but he's forgetting that the principle of freedom of speech is a lynchpin of the ability to pursue happyness, and it's being violated here. Way to miss the forest for the tree, man.

 

[RonMAIDEN]

How do the gay employees of Chik-fil-a feel? It should be slap in their face and why did the company feel they needed to make a stand on any side since this is a poor business desicion and it's still going to cost them lost revenue.

 

[Mark86]

Right, a free county and the University of Kansas is doing what they want.

It makes absolutely no sense. Do they know which organizations each business on their campus dontes to? How many liberal actors do you see on tv spewing their opinions about politics? Does that mean all of those that don't agree should boycott their films? To me, the university of Kansas and whoever else is boycotting chick-Fil-a is not doing the right thing. In a free country, differences in opinions is what makes things work. The common noting is if you don't agree with the popular belief, you are shunned. Doesn't sound like a democracy.

 

[Thai]

How do the gay employees of Chik-fil-a feel? It should be slap in their face and why did the company feel they needed to make a stand on any side since this is a poor business desicion and it's still going to cost them lost revenue.

It is ONE guy's opinion...NOT corporate policy!!!!!!!!! Nor is this Chik's policy for who they serve!! And his opinion is that he believes in his religion's beliefs. He did NOT say that he hates anything!! Nor was this interview meant for this topic only.

Btw, you guys know why Chik closes on Sundays, right?

I can see divorcees suing Chik for this CEO's belief in life long love for one person!!!!! How dare he!!! I want to cheat on my love ones Damn it!

 

[RandyDaytona]

I don't think it's wrong for Chik-Fil-A to support whatever causes they want, and I don't think it's wrong for other people or businesses to boycott them for it. It's all free speech.

Exactly.

Their establishments do not discriminate against the customers they serve and it doesn't change how they operate as a restaurant. Gotta love the liberals and how they swing things.

They may not "discriminate" in the sense that they don't overtly ban gays from their restaurants, but that certainly doesn't make it all OK. How would you feel if you belonged to any group and a company came out publicly and said they don't support your group or what you believe in? Would it be wrong for you to feel offended by that, maybe decide not to do business with that company?

I'm not gay and I'm not a "liberal" (amazing how we automatically seem to reach for that term to oversimplify those we disagree with). But any CEO of a private company who makes his personal beliefs public is going to live or die by them. If he gets support from it or suffers from it, it's HIS fault for the results. No one else's.

Personally, anyone who throws their religion in my face and apparently thinks he's 'better' than someone else because he's on his first marriage (where the F does THAT come from?) is a total tool and isn't going to get my business, anyway. That goes for whether he's christian, muslim, gay, straight, black, white, or purple.

 

[momo.75]

I don't want to start a pissing match, but there are certain color 4Runners that I can't stand. I hope nobody finds out what they are, but i feel like i have the right not to like them......:lol:

 

[Thai]

I don't want to start a pissing match, but there are certain color 4Runners that I can't stand. I hope nobody finds out what they are, but i feel like i have the right not to like them......:lol:

If I was still Admin, then I would ban your arse!!

 

[momo.75]

If I was still Admin, then I would ban your arse!!

Don't give Mark any ideas...:snacker:

 

[IanB]

I don't want to start a pissing match, but there are certain color 4Runners that I can't stand. I hope nobody finds out what they are, but i feel like i have the right not to like them......:lol:

Can a mod get this hate speech cleaned up and out of this thread?:

 

[momo.75]

oh now it is on.......don't even get me started on the 4Runner gen that i am not too keen on.....:bash:

 

[zstampe]

oh now it is on.......don't even get me started on the 4Runner gen that i am not too keen on.....:bash:

 

[momo.75]

lol....

 

[KidVermicious]

Exactly.



They may not "discriminate" in the sense that they don't overtly ban gays from their restaurants, but that certainly doesn't make it all OK. How would you feel if you belonged to any group and a company came out publicly and said they don't support your group or what you believe in? Would it be wrong for you to feel offended by that, maybe decide not to do business with that company?

I'm not gay and I'm not a "liberal" (amazing how we automatically seem to reach for that term to oversimplify those we disagree with). But any CEO of a private company who makes his personal beliefs public is going to live or die by them. If he gets support from it or suffers from it, it's HIS fault for the results. No one else's.

Personally, anyone who throws their religion in my face and apparently thinks he's 'better' than someone else because he's on his first marriage (where the F does THAT come from?) is a total tool and isn't going to get my business, anyway. That goes for whether he's christian, muslim, gay, straight, black, white, or purple.

This is all exactly right, as far as it goes. What folks are missing is that the University of Kansas, a government institution, and the City of Boston, a government institution, do not get to take action against the company Chik-Fil-A because of the opinions of it's owner. It's against the law. PEOPLE can boycott that company all they want, government institutions cannot.

The board of regents or whatever KU has that is making this decision are welcome to boycott the restaurant, picket it, write letters to the editor about it, whatever they want to do provided it's on their own time and under their own name. But when they are making decisions as the KU Board of Regents, they ARE KU, and don't get to do what they're trying to do.

That's what this argument is about. Those of you that are trying to make this about liberals vs conservatives or gays vs christians are completely missing the point. This is about the violation of due process of law in order to suppress the free speech of a private citizen by government entities. Everybody should be outraged by this, and instead this thread is choked with small thinkers playing identify politics and trying to win an argument instead of debating an issue.

I'm out.