@Lucy
Your entire post is a great example of using stats to prove anything. The factual point remains that the corporation has an extremely low rate of employee turnover and of harassment claims (of all types) which is precisely opposite of what Form (and you apparently) allege.
So what we're looking at here is a company that strongly suggests that they wouldn't hire someone they found to be gay and then says straight-up that they'd fire an employee found to be gay.
The part is bold is a straight up lie. In nothing regarding this corporation does it say such a thing. In fact, the companies official position contrary to what you just alledged is this:
The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our Restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.
That's directly from their website and is (again) directly opposite of what you allege.
I am only asserting that Chick-fil-A said it discriminates against gay employees,
Its never said this, and in fact is about the most untruthful thing you've said.
I've said nothing about employee turnover or harassment claims. Employee turnover is low, sure, I'm not interested in that. I don't know about harassment claims and I don't give a crap what Forma alleges. The only thing I've proved with stats is that Chick-fil-A can legally discriminate against gays at most of their stores.
I have alleged
one thing, and that is the thing you called a lie. Why would I lie? Here's the quote from your Forbes article again.
Family members of prospective operators--children, even--are frequently interviewed so Cathy and his family can learn more about job candidates and their relationships at home. "If a man can't manage his own life, he can't manage a business," says Cathy, who says he would probably fire an employee or terminate an operator who "has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members."
What kind of sinfulness do you suppose "counts"? Maybe I'm wrong when I suppose that being openly gay counts, but it's hardly a stretch, and nowhere near baseless enough to constitute a "lie". Don't you yourself consider homosexuality sinful? Why wouldn't Dan Cathy?
Even if you are correct that leaves at least 25% (well over 400 stores) that can be. So....where are all the lawsuits?
No, math. It's 25% of their stores
at most that are in states where they can't discriminate based on sexual orientation. It's at least 11%. It's not super important to what I'm saying but if you're gonna use numbers you gotta use them correctly.
Now, I'm not asserting that Chick-fil-A illegally discriminates against gay employees.
You dont think you are implying that by posting all that crap?
Wow.
Nope. (Why's it crap?)
I choose words carefully. Please read them carefully.
Now, I'm not asserting that Chick-fil-A illegally discriminates against gay employees. I am only asserting that Chick-fil-A said it discriminates against gay employees, and that they can't be sued for doing that in at least 75% of their stores.
Where are the lawsuits? Well, it seems fair to give Chick-fil-A the benefit of any doubt and assume that they obey the law and do not discriminate against gay employees at the ≤25% of their stores where it is illegal to do so.
I cannot demonstrate that Chick-fil-A discriminates against gay employees at the ≥75% of their stores where it is completely legal for them to do so. I am not trying to demonstrate that. All I'm saying is that in those stores they are legally in the clear to fire or refuse to hire sinners, and that Cathy said that he would do that.
You cannot demonstrate that Chick-fil-A does not discriminate against gay employees at the ≥75% of their stores where it is completely legal for them to do so. If they do fire or refuse to hire gay sinners, it's perfectly legal. So why do you insist that they do not?
.
