What about freedom of speech?
I think the whole conversation was put out of control really. I believe the owner of the franchise just stated he supports traditional marriage. It may have been religously ba
How come people have the right to voice pro-gay beliefs but not anti-gay beliefs? Seems like a double standard, huh?
I have nothing against gay people at all, and one of my best friends is gay. But I respect people who disagree.
To hate another for disagreeing with your pro-gay stance is just as bad as them being anti-gay.
I am going on the info that is available to the public here and do not claim to have direct knowledge of the situation. But from what I understand the company is funding organizations that want to deny gay people equal rights under the law not just spouting off an opinion.
Look at it this way. Someone could say as a woman you should not have the right to vote, work, should not have the right to contraceptives and you should be married off by your father and barefoot and pregnant. That is an opinion. Now if the company was bankrolling groups who want to take away your rights as a woman would you still be cool with that?
It's not like the groups they support are only doing things against gay rights. They probably do a lot of good things too.
That was not a previous right though. Not in all states. Some judges made rulings on it using reinterpertation as their context. That was likely a mistake on this issue because it has created the argument of rights gained then lost then taken away. That is what happens when a major social issue such as this is decided on by a few individuals. The issue is obscured when a right is granted without a previous precedent and without an in depth analysis. The right is a social right only at this time.
own opinions are great, Mine is just NOT his.
I have no issue with people voicing an opinion I disagree with. But funding groups actively trying to deny people equal rights under the law is not cool. And as for their beliefs. They are not running a church and should keep their beliefs out of the business. Again just an opinion.
The problem is it would play both ways here. One could say that people shouldn't speak about gat rights as well because it's their opinion. It can't be OK one way and not the other. That is what the first demonstration was about. The process of gaining rights is defined two ways really. Some use a religous context when discussing the issue, others use sci and history as their context. The real issue is the granted right is social only. The society as a whole has to decide if it's allowable. This is gettig to deep not though. LOL =) I've typed enough.
How does it go both ways? Last time I checked there was no movement amongst gay people to take away the rights of straight people.
The right was granted recently in a few states by judges in most cases based on all social arguments. When making decissions of this kind it's best to look back a history to see what the outcome was. This idea is actually not as new as people may think. It went by other categories in the past. Finding out how it impacted those socities is the best way to determine the best course.
Since they don't have one I think it was a great idea.
It is so funny how liberals and bigots can only hear what they want when a person doesn't agree with their view point.
And the Appreciation Day really showed what people thought when a business was attacked for no reason by people who have zero sense........Loved the Chicken sandwich
I think its disgusting. People are using support for free speech as an excuse to support a business man who hates on people. Call it what you will, but that's the bottom line.
"The real issue at hand is not freedom of speech or same-sex marriage but Chick-fil-A's secretive funding of documented anti-gay hate groups. The national organization Campus Pride made this clear last week in releasing "5 Simple Facts About Chick-fil-A ." Campus Pride specifically called upon our nation's student leaders to share the truth about Chick-fil-A and its funding of radical-right-wing organizations and documented hate groups.
Through its family-controlled nonprofit arm, Chick-fil-A profits have funded such groups as Eagle Forum, Exodus International, Family Research Council, and Focus on the Family. These groups proudly and aggressively work against the rights of LGBT people, advocating their criminalization, psychological abuse, and death. Chick-fil-A has not disputed any of these facts. The "5 Simple Facts About Chick-fil-A" are well documented, showing the funneling of Chick-fil-A profits to anti-gay causes and even a hate group, as determined by the Southern Poverty Law Center ."
I have a hard time with the word hate groups in general. Basically you can call anything a hate group if they don't agree with you. Some pay money to fund what they believe. This is how limiting freedom of speech and thought starts. Similar tactics have been used in the past. Turn those who disagree with you into your enemy. I have realatives that lived through that and fled their countries to get away from that. The US has to be careful when dealing with control speech. It can get out of hand fast if it's aloud too.
Let me put it to you this way: If he came out and publicly said: "I don't think black people or women shouldn't have the right to vote," I wouldn't support him or his business. This is no different to me.
Sorry, wasn't sure if your question was for me. I've had family members arrested and held in the past because of what they thought. I know of people who've been blackballed by their govt so it's hard to get a job or send their kids to good schools. When I hear elected officals saying things like he can't get a business license in my town because of his belief, it reminds me of what my realitves have told me. It starts small like that then grows in the society allows it. I know people who went through bad times in the cultrual revolution in China also. People can be swayed fast when using languand like hate speech or hate groups when it's really just differnece of opinion.
That would be fine with me. When a group is referred to as a hate group because they have a belief that is different than mine, then I could do the same. That causes division and the problem starts rolling from there. It can roll fast if it's allowed too.
I don't think they view it as hatred. They view it as preservation. Their might be some who say they hate another person because of their lifestyle but I think the chic-fil-a incident was to fold in philosophy. One to say to the govt, you can't penalize a person based on his belief and freedom of speech. Two to show support for what they also believe. The incident was actually more serious than people realize to my mind. When govt officials start making open statments about beliefs, that is serious to my mind. Many cultures have been terrorized and controlled using similar tactics. As for the rights of groups, the society as a whole usually determines what behaviors will be acquired. I understand your frustration and am sorry to hear about it. Not all cultures view realtionships the same. The other side has said they think the family and traditonal marriage is under attack. Words like attack and hate group rile people up and really just divide the nation.
Its there right to feel the anyway they want about it. Ppl need to realize you cant force ppl to believe in what u do.