Alderman of 1st Ward Proco "Joe" Moreno thinks Daily Show viewers are his path to glory... (Chicago: construction, living)

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

They are denying the permit due to congestion issues.

Case closed. Next?

Bingo.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander - Moreno is also entitled to his opinion & his right to free speech. In fact, he seems to have worked hard to try to get the company to insert some anti-discrimination language in their hiring policies.

Totally agreed he made a mess trying to score political points, but what he says to the media isn't the same thing as formally denying a zoning request due to the applicant's views on gay marriage.

[Vlajos]

Atlanta has a lot of these dumps. People should go there for some ****ty food.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Chet, we'll see. My guess is the stupid chain chicken sandwich place moves on.

... I tend to think they will look at the whole picture and decide that it makes more sense to open more stores where there are more people willing to work cheap, drive thru all day and a whole long list of other pluses to giving up on this location. If they play it right they get a location at O'Hare that does 50x the volume...

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by chet everett

... I tend to think they will look at the whole picture and decide that it makes more sense to open more stores where there are more people willing to work cheap, drive thru all day and a whole long list of other pluses to giving up on this location. If they play it right they get a location at O'Hare that does 50x the volume...

You mean in Park Ridge or Rosemont? Then yeah, have at it.

[jonnynonos]

Anyway, there is already one downtown that is packed constantly. Peoples' principals crumble in the face of their overwhelming desire for fried chicken, waffle fries and milkshakes. Dan Cathy knows this, thus why he conducts himself with such impudence.

Whoever would have thought that "Chick Fil A" would perhaps become the phrase most associated in the universe with "homosexual marriage."

The history books will one day tell the story of how these two powerhouse groups squared off against each other in 2012.

[Chicago South Sider]

This is pathetic. This guy doesn't want to let a company set up shop because they aren't waving a rainbow flag? That's hilarious.

[A2DAC1985]

I read this opinion piece today:

Change of Subject: Alderman lays an egg in opposing Chick-fil-A

And I got to this part:

"Those who are cheering on these pols ought to imagine the jackboot on the other foot – reactionary public officials in some backwater town denying an entrepreneur the right to operate an ordinary business simply because he’s an open supporter of Obamacare, abortion rights or even marriage equality."

... and I knew he was right. It was hypocritical to support it.


But then I thought about it for a few seconds and realized that it isn't hypocritical in the least.

Why?

Someone can be an open supporter for Obamacare, and everyone no matter their race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, etc. is granted access to insurance, and they can choose whether or not they want to go to the doctor, or get a procedure done. No one is forcing them to utilize it.

Someone can be an open supporter for abortion rights, and everyone no matter their race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, etc. is has the choice of whether or not to have an abortion. No one is forcing them to utilize those rights.

Someone can be an open supporter for marriage equality, and everyone no matter their race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, etc. is granted the choice of whether or not they want to marry. No one is forcing them to wed.


But if someone is an open supporter of anti-gay marriage, they are expressing their opinion that certain people should be excluded from a right that any other person has, *just because*.

If that person also gives money to a group or cause, then that group uses the money to continue to suppress or deny rights of certain individuals that everyone else enjoys, *just because*, then that's a problem in which I think the government (the one that says we are entitled to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, via the Declaration of Independence) should address.



*IF* I decided to open up a hot dog stand called "Willy's Wieners", would that be okay?

*IF* I'm an avowed atheist who is outspoken about my beliefs and makes it part of "Willy's Wieners" work culture, would that be okay?

*IF* I took a portion of the money I made from "Willy's Wieners" and gave it to an atheist group, would that be okay?

*IF* I took a portion of my money made from "Willy's Wieners" and gave it to the group K-ROG, Kick Religion Outta Government, that actively works towards making an amendment and laws that would disqualify any candidate for a government position if they had a religious affiliation because *I* *believe* that, "The Constitution says government and religion shouldn't be together, just like the Founding Fathers intended"... would that be okay?


I think any genuine American believes the first three to be acceptable.

I also think any genuine American would look at the last one and think it is unacceptable, and they wouldn't want Willy's Wieners, no matter how tasty they are, to open up in their neighborhood, or city. After all, the last one is not just me expressing myself, but me giving money towards people that are actively trying to seclude a portion of the population from participating in something that another portion of the population has access to and can enjoy.



So, in summary:

- C-F-A can say whatever they want.
- C-F-A can donate money to whatever/whomever they want.
- C-F-A can run their business however they want.
- C-F-A can P----- off a lot of people by giving money to people/groups that actively try to stop people from enjoying all the rights and benefits the rest of the population has.
- C-F-A and supporters of their stance on homosexual marriage cannot play the victim when they hold views and give money to groups that keep people below them in terms of legal equality in America, when the Declaration of Independence states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."



Just some more thoughts.

[chet everett]

Dude, A2DAC1985, you are so totally WRONG that it is scary you even posting. The GOVERNMENT has no ability to control ANY use of PRIVATE CITIZEN'S money, spending, speech, political views or any other such legitimate PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS!

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Dude, A2DAC1985, you are so totally WRONG that it is scary you even posting. The GOVERNMENT has no ability to control ANY use of PRIVATE CITIZEN'S money, spending, speech, political views or any other such legitimate PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS!

Maybe, but the government tries to control our private lives all the time. Gay marriage and abortion being very good examples.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Maybe, but the government tries to control our private lives all the time. Gay marriage and abortion being very good examples.

... Prohibition and the War on Drugs another.