Mayor of Boston is opposed to Chick-Fil-A in his City

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, if I ever make it to the USA for another time in my life, i will probably visit a Chick-Fil-A! :lol:
Any publicity is good publicity ;)
 
Wait, you guys think people are going to Chick-Fila-A because of gay marriage, one way of the other? Seriously?
No.

Some are. Others are going because they need their indignation freak on. Others are going just to see the fuss. Others are going because they don't like gays.

Bottomline: hype.
 
You may not beat me over the head, because I would gladly acquiesce that the CEO of Chikken joints does have increased scrutiny on some issues as well. Despite the fact that a mayor may not have direct control of all zoning, he has increased scrutiny regarding governmental permits. While the CEO of a franchised restaurant chain may not have any sort of real power to enforce discriminatory serving policies on individual franchise owners where it would be illegal, yes he would be subject to increased scrutiny if he said his chain shouldn't serve or hire homosexuals.

I understand the immediate practicalities differ, but I am really more interested in hearing what makes the power of the Chick-fil-A President any fundamentally different from that of the Mayor. I would argue that, in a certain sense, the type of power that each wields is identical, if capable of being exercised through differing mechanisms. They both, for example, wield some command over hierarchic social structures; to this end I would hasten to propose that the actions of both the Mayor and the President merit an equal level of scrutiny.
 
And by "they", you mean corporation. It's ok to be in favor of corporate liberty, just don't be so shy about it.

I wasn't talking about corporation. I was talking about the people employed by Chick-Fil-A. I was talking about the people who want to eat at Chick-Fil-A without driving to Cambridge.
 
I wasn't talking about corporation. I was talking about the people employed by Chick-Fil-A. I was talking about the people who want to eat at Chick-Fil-A without driving to Cambridge.
What side would you take if Chick-fil-a didn't not want to open a restaurant in Boston? Would you be concerned about the lost liberty of potential employees and local custoimers?
 
What side would you take if Chick-fil-a didn't not want to open a restaurant in Boston? Would you be concerned about the lost liberty of potential employees and local custoimers?

That's like saying not having sex is the same as having an abortion. My situation involves taking something away from the people.
 
...yes. More indirectly (more publicity -> more customers), granted, but there are those going just to show their support and their opposition for the modern trend towards tolerance in society, decline of fundamentalist Christian values, etc etc - it's never about the 'trigger cause', but that can still provide a focus.

Don't take this the wrong way but you are in the UK, I honestly don't think you have any room to comment (relevantly, I mean).

1.) Many people are going to Chick-Fila-A right now because its a good way to stick it to percieved liberal hippies, full stop. Every time someone hears a Forma clone in their life go off on Chick-Fila-A and they are right of spectrum it gives them a good opportunity to snub them. And get lunch, which they were going to do anyway. Or what Ziggy said.

2.) That, and it is attracting libertarian and freedom of speech types (including lefties).

3.) But most importantly, if you were even a cursory fan or the joint before all this all it has accomplished is to make people react by supporting a company they enjoy and want to see continue.

4.) After listening to it mentioned constantly on the TV/Radio/Internet for a week now, how could you not crave it?

For me (I ate lunch there yesterday), in order of precedence, it was 4/1/2/3. Having no dog in the SSM fight, it had nothing to do with that.

As soon as some on these boards understand that the motivations of these people are not at all as nefarious as the desperately want, they will understand how this whole thing backfired on them.
 
Indeed. But that works two ways. The reasons are not as nefarious as you say, and they're not as noble as others claim.

edit: I live in Dutchland. But we have people here too. So may be I could have just a little bit of room to comment. Just a post stamp sized room maybe.
 
Don't take this the wrong way but you are in the UK, I honestly don't think you have any room to comment (relevantly, I mean).

As a internet forum this site is of international access. Hence comment can be made, so long as observation is done first.
 
Don't take this the wrong way but you are in the UK, I honestly don't think you have any room to comment (relevantly, I mean).

1.) Many people are going to Chick-Fila-A right now because its a good way to stick it to percieved liberal hippies, full stop. Every time someone hears a Forma clone in their life go off on Chick-Fila-A and they are right of spectrum it gives them a good opportunity to snub them. And get lunch, which they were going to do anyway. Or what Ziggy said.

2.) That, and it is attracting libertarian and freedom of speech types (including lefties).

3.) But most importantly, if you were even a cursory fan or the joint before all this all it has accomplished is to make people react by supporting a company they enjoy and want to see continue.

4.) After listening to it mentioned constantly on the TV/Radio/Internet for a week now, how could you not crave it?

For me (I ate lunch there yesterday), in order of precedence, it was 4/1/2/3. Having no dog in the SSM fight, it had nothing to do with that.

As soon as some on these boards understand that the motivations of these people are not at all as nefarious as the desperately want, they will understand how this whole thing backfired on them.

That's what I mean - the debate has given them a huge number of new customers, who would not have gone there had there been no argument over SSM. However, I'm convinced that many of group 1) also - because of how political beliefs tend to correlate - are doing it to stick it to the gay power lobby.
 
I think this is a nefarious way to kill off the homophobic community - trick them into overindulging in unhealthy food.
 
I find it hard to believe the entire thing is a movement based off of "sticking it to perceived Liberal hippies" and celebrating "freedom of speech," these two motivations just seem inconsistent with past behavior related to this sort of thing, for the same reason that these good people weren't just demonstrating to stick it to those damnable libs. Far more reasonable an assertion is that they're expressing solidarity with an organization whose leadership that is anti-gay, in acknowledgement of their own anti-gay sensibilities, and that's entirely their prerogative. People care way more about standing up for something they believe in than making a political point.
 
Its more believable to you, because you want to believe that.

Has anyone shown any significant proof of anti gay demonstrations at these locations? Cat calls? Signs? Internet rants (of the caliber that now unemployed idiot anti Chick-Fila-A dude did, but from the other side)?

Nobody here has posted any, I have not seen any in the news. I think you are simply having trouble grappling with the enormity of the backfire.

And honestly, its because there is a chicken sandwich involved. As Cartman famously said. "punch and pie."
 
I find it hard to believe the entire thing is a movement based off of "sticking it to perceived Liberal hippies" and celebrating "freedom of speech," these two motivations just seem inconsistent with past behavior related to this sort of thing, for the same reason that these good people weren't just demonstrating to stick it to those damnable libs. Far more reasonable an assertion is that they're expressing solidarity with an organization whose leadership that is anti-gay, in acknowledgement of their own anti-gay sensibilities, and that's entirely their prerogative. People care way more about standing up for something they believe in than making a political point.

I've got a rule of thumb that large-scale human actions - elections, wars, you name it - are rarely traceable to a single cause, and if you ask somebody at the time why they are taking part in them, it's never really down to the reason they'll give you. Part of this is that people are worried by the movements towards tolerance; the same thing happened in the Civil Rights era. Part of it is that people are worried about the increased role of the government in censorship, surveillance and maintaining the rule of law; they see this as Big Government stamping on Small Citizen and are upset by it. Part of it is that people want to be individualists, and we instinctively fight back when people tell us what to do, or what to believe. Some if it is because Chick-Fil-A make good food. It's not because lots of people believe that Chick-Fil-A's owner opposing gay marriage deserves their custom.

Has anyone shown any significant proof of anti gay demonstrations at these locations? Cat calls? Signs? Internet rants (of the caliber that now unemployed idiot anti Chick-Fila-A dude did, but from the other side)?

Absence of evidence, evidence of absence, and all that.
 
Again, Menino has done no such thing because he has no actual power to do so.

This point is simply meaningless. Although he may not have such power to do so, what exactly do you think 'abuse of power' is?

Its when politicians do things they have no actual power to do.

In his initial comments on this matter it implied that he would abuse the power of his elected position to take action against Chic-Fil-A. A few days later, probably after long discussions with his attorneys, he backed off those comments and played his own 'free speech' card.

Thats what started this entire discussion. Your comment above simply makes no sense. Nixon didnt have any power to do what he did either, yet he did it.
 
I would hazard that most of the previously-neutral people didn't eat there anyway, so its actual impact on the level of custom is probably impossible to tell from that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom