SO, they don't actually treat folks differently. They, corporately, give money to folks you don't like. So, is it just intolerance on your part that is the problem?
And yet, you'd be the first person crying about others who might boycott folks like, I don't know... Starbucks, because of their wearing their atheism or their immorality on their sleeve? Seems a skosh of the hypocrisy to me....
They do. how? I can't find a single citation of them having done so. So why mischaracterize their donations as active support?
How does the Chick A fil law enshrine bigotry? Please explain. Soon, Jews with not be allowed to refer to non Jews as gentiles. Mustn't have bigotry.
No...I wouldn't because I just do not care what other individuals do unless it is harmful. How can you wear Atheism on your sleeve? How is coffee immoral?
No what it means is that if CEO of an airline company wanted to contribute money to a campaign to legalize multi-party marriage in Texas, The mayor of San Antonio could not target any contracts with the city, based on said contributions. I am going to surprise a lot of my friends here. On first glance, I am going to support this statute.. I think it is a bad idea for governments to make decisions to boycott specific corporations based on the private political behavior of its CEO. I have not done sufficient research, but what I have done, has not shown a pattern of discriminatory behavior against gays in hiring or public accommodation in the operating of the actual business enterprise, despite the views of its CEO. I am uninterested in where its corporate management's personal checks go, or what they say outside of the office just as I am uninterested in whether the motive is faith based or not. Save the boycott for when Chick-o fil refuses to seat John and Steve, and their 12 year old son or when they refuse to promote Alex as a manager, because he marches in the local gay rights parade, or when they start targeting a transsexual in middle management for early retirement before he goes out on leave for his transition surgery. It was a boneheaded move to organize a boycott, because Chick-o-fil would not remove its CEO based on his expression and opposition to same sex marriage in the first place. Unless there is a lot more to this, I don't want him to lose his job.
Backing legislation is not discriminatory in itself. It does not violate any anti-discrimination laws. I agree that if they refused service to a customer, based on their sexual orientation, then that WOULD be discrimination, but nothing indicates that this is the company's policy. Their policy seems to be to serve anybody.
Mehhh....there are a lot of legislation that I do not agree with....or with people that back it. If people worry about where other people spend their money, we will all be pissed at each other and would likely never buy another product from a large company...and many small companies.
Should someone have their right to support legislation you don't agree with protected from arbitrary discrimination by the state?
What in God's name are you projecting. Seriously, how do you go far off tangent from a simple remark.
Well my defense of them IS due to the controversy! Why would they need any defense if there was no controversy? I'm defending them against baseless accusations that they are anti-gay. If there was evidence that they discriminate against gay people then I would join the boycotts.
Remember This law forbids such government behavior as San Antonio denying Chick-A-fil access to do business. Specifically over Chick-A-fil's anti LGBT perceptions. Chick-A-fil committed no crimes nor proselytizing an anti LGBT message. Should the City of San Antonio be allowed such power as they abused with Chick-A-fil? This is a "good law". And from Texas. Who woulda . . . Moi Don't ize, Got FREEDOM Less and less.
Your erroneous use of the words 'the same' tells me have either never eaten at Chick Fil A or it has been so many years you have clearly forgotten.
Whoa. So not true. You and I both know that BOTH sides can be *******s.... I'm just not afraid to admit it.
