I Pit Hypocritical Fundamentalist GOPers

IMHO Tom Menino’s public statements about how difficult Chick-Fil-A will find it to get a restaurant in Boston are wrong, antithetical to the 1st Amendment even. But let’s not pretend that a lot of the religious conservatives kvetching are Really Concerned For Freedom and Liberty, as they so whine. They didn’t protest Texas textbook censorship, they didn’t protest sodomy laws, they don’t protest Texas book blocking, they’ve never protested institutionalized discrimination against the disenfranchised (since the disenfranchised never represent the traditional mold), & they don’t protest that LGBTs should have the same rights straights do now. Defenders of freedom and liberty? In whose world? And how the hell do they expect to have any political capital when they now claim to stand against government officials forcing their ideas on us?

Tom Menino and Rahm Emanuel have strengthened these ‘fundamentalist GOPers’ hands for them by this latest stupidity.

Frankly, it doesn’t matter to me whether the Republicans who object to these mayors’ behavior are hypocritical. I object to that behavior regardless of who else objects. Blocking businesses based purely on the public speech of the owner rather than on any specific illegal or unethical practices of the business goes against important small “d” democratic principles, and is og-damned unAmerican.

Shouldn’t matter whether other critics are self serving in their criticism. If “we” in the mayors’ party defend them because of that, or even attack opposition critics instead of accepting the valid nature of their critique, we’re no less hypocritical.

I’m sure Rahm is quaking in his boots over the possibility that this might strengthen the GOP in Chicago after he trounced five other candidates (all Democrats) in the 2011 election. I wasn’t paying attention and thought it was a Democrat primary and that the Republican primary was being ignored by the press. No, it was a nonpartisan election and no Republicans got on the ballot.

Anyway, a mayor can only give his opinion. He cannot actually block a business license himself. He has people for that.

If Rahm wants the licenses blocked, they’ll be blocked. It’s Chicago. And no, he has no reason to fear a Republican takeover of city politics, but this sort of thing is visible outside of Chicago (and Boston). And since we know the Republics like “tu quoque” better than anything else, how long do you suppose it’ll be before a GOP mayor or governor makes things difficult for businesses owned by large progressive/Dem contributors?

Remember the CEO of Chick-Fil-A and his ilk only understand money. They may talk about religion, scripture, morals or what have you, the only way to get their attention is to hit them in their fat wallets. Whatever they say, money is what they really worship.

So the sheriff says, “Get out of town because you are an evil fuck that is only causing trouble. We have enough criminals and creeps, we don’t need you.”

A Babe Ruth bat to their wallet is the only thing that will get their attention. It’s only when it costs them money that they start to reconsider their views. We’ve seen this with many big corporations from Wal-Mart to Apple and to any number of others.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Maybe these bigots should start to square their views with what the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution say, not what they wish it said.

I just love how the Chick-fil-a boss is so biblical and all and when that’s a bit inconvenient he turns around and bears false witness by saying the Muppet toys are dangerous.

What bugs me is that this kind of pressure always and only comes down on small fry like Chik-Fil-A, and over moral-cultural issues that are really of secondary importance to economic and class and environmental issues.

Look, if you wanna make your dollar count politically this way, get real. Boycott everything made or sold by Koch Industries, which bankrolls the political spending of the Koch Brothers.

Oh, wait – you can’t, can you?

Nah, small d-democratic principle would be to hold a quorum and determine how best to use the land that was made for you and me. If the majority decide Chick-Fil-A is the best use of the land, the others can stick with their conscience and decide to boycott it. Course, property rights and contract being what they are in American law, the idea of that happening is unthinkable. Private property in public hands? Bleh. When we completely eliminate the government we’ll be able to work out a system of catallactics and liberty and prosperity for all will follow, like in Somalia!

Anyway, where are the Constitutional conservatives that harp on about state’s rights and how the civil rights act was anathema since it was an imposition from federal government?

Hmm. Learn something new every day. F’rinstance, I’m surprised to discover, at this stage of my life, that small “d” democracy connotes socialized use of private property. (Or were you under the impression, gamerunknown, that Chik Fil A was trying to purchase or lease public property for their restaurants in Chicago or Boston?)

They lament freedom and liberty only for themselves.

They didn’t get the memo.

Does it matter in this case that funds for gay-hate causes came directly from the company not just the owner?

http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201103220005

http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201103220005#4

http://news.change.org/stories/chick-fil-a-partners-with-rabid-anti-gay-group

The company is privately held. But when it makes charitable contributions directly it saves the owner some tax money.

Maybe it’s the rest of us - who live in the real world but don’t know we’re still idealists - who didn’t get the memo.

We’re tribes now. Socially and politically, we function as tribes. You get a lot further by appealing to tribal ideas like “one nation under God” - or even, on the other side, gay rights - than to muzzy generalities like “liberty and justice for all.” Nobody gives a shit about the “all.”

I have to disaghree with this. The Chik-Fil-A guy definitely believes in his religion, above and beyond money. Chik-Fil-A restaurants are closed on Sundays, even the Mall Food Court restaurants, and even though all the other ones are open. There’s no way he’d turn down the extra cash that being open on Sunday would bring in if Mammon were his god.
He also clearly supports things consistent with his faith. Yearsd before the Diisney Narnia movies, Chik-Fil-A was giving away Narnia adaptations with their kids’ meals, since they’re grounded in Christianity . I have to admit, I admired the guy for his principled stands.

Except I can’t support him on this.

Agreed. And now Ed Lee, mayor of San Francisco, has joined in the stupid.

We don’t even have this chain anywhere I’ve seen in Northern California! I guess there’s one 40 miles away, somewhere. But they’d better not come here, nosirree!.
Roddy

Political hypocrites in the pit? Is this another day that ends in y?

I honestly don’t think that’s true. Why would they be closed Sunday if money was their only concern? How much more money would they be able to make if they weren’t closed an extra 53 days out of the year?

If money is their only motivation, how do you explain them being closed on Sundays?

I went to Chik Fil A once but was not wowed by the food or service and have never been back.

Now that several years have passed and I have learned more about their policies. I have no intention of giving them my business. I have also found that many other outlets have chicken bettter than CFA.

I do try not to buy Koch paper products and I also do not patronize Urban Outfitters and Anthropologie.

Well, I guess it’s a matter of opinion but what outlets have you found that have chicken better than CFA?

Just today I happened to have a McDonald’s “Southern Style Chicken” sandwich, which is clearly their attempt to copy CFA’s standard chicken sandwich. It was OK, but CFA’s is definitely better. IMO.

Did I miss something about those stores?