# Is the media guilty of distorting Dan Cathy's remarks? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 26, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463 "2012-07-26T16:42:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2012, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/81 "2012-07-28T22:10:58Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yeah, it is interesting. While I see nothing wrong with a mayor offering his opinion as a citizen, once he hints that he’s going to bring the power of his office to bear against a company that has broken zero laws and done nothing wrong, that’s a problem. And in Emanuel’s case, when he worked for Obama, Obama was against SSM, as well. Talk about hypocritical! So when government officials announced they were going to go after cigarette companies they were wrong? Need to wait for them to break laws publicly before you can even investigate? When people show up at town hall meeting to object to a strip club going in they are being un-American? What’s the point of even having elected officials if they aren’t going to be allowed to use the power we’ve given them. We have an entire legal system to determine if the elected officials are acting within the law. If they break the law by all means go after them. So far all we have is a few elected officials grand standing. Now that they’ve announced their intentions it should be incredibly easy to prove they are doing so in effort to block someones first amendment rights. All they’ve done so far is appealed to their voters, something I expect elected officials to do. Really if their intent was to block Chick fil A, they would have said nothing and used the power of a silent bureaucracy to grind to a halt any new chick fil a restaurants. If their behavior is so abhorrent and Un-American then we need not worry about them in the future because no American would vote for them. ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2012, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/82 "2012-07-28T23:26:41Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Because it has nothing to do with what I wrote. I said they were right to criticize Cathy’s comments and wrong to block any license to Chik-fil-A. Of course you could have figured all of this out for yourself by reading the post. Perhaps you should go back and read what I wrote out again, because that’s precisely what Emmanuel, Menino and Christine Quinn-- among others-- have virtually stated. But I’m sure you knew this. BTW\> “Supporting the rights of their own gay citizens”? What’s that supposed to mean? How does refusing to let a company who’s CEO holds a different viewpoint than your own constitution “supporting the rights of their own gay citizens”? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/83 "2012-07-29T00:42:18Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > My objection is that the belief that it somehow benefits society to expand marriage to include SS couples , religious or not, is grounded in nothing. There is no rational foundation, no data to support such a belief. To intentionally deny someone the same rights you enjoy, on a foundation of nothing, is no way to make public policy. > > For all the conservative cries of indoctrination by gays and progressives the fact is that no group has indoctrinated our citizenry more than Christianity. Some vague non specific feeling that SSM is wrong , with no data to support it is IMO a prime example. Whoops :o that should read, My objection is that the belief that it somehow **harms** society to expand marriage to include SS couples , religious or not, is grounded in nothing ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/84 "2012-07-29T01:05:57Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > Perhaps you should go back and read what I wrote out again, because that’s precisely what Emmanuel, Menino and Christine Quinn-- among others-- have virtually stated. It’s _precisely_ what they _virtually_ stated? That sounds a lot like “that’s not what they said.” Anyway: I reread your post again and it’s still non-responsive. I said several times that the cities shouldn’t deny Chik-fil-A licenses but that Cathy’s comments and the company’s position are crap. I’m not sure why you’re intent on asking me to repeat myself. > [@](#): > > BTW\> “Supporting the rights of their own gay citizens”? What’s that supposed to mean? I mean they are right to denounce Cathy’s anti-gay stance. As I said, they called his views what they are: Menino: “There is no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail.” Emanuel: “Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values […] They’re not respectful of our neighbors, our residents and our backgrounds.” ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/85 "2012-07-29T01:12:10Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > Why not just believe what you want, and be happy with that? Why bother telling others that they must abide by your moral code? No one is saying he doesn’t have a right to his beliefs. What people ARE saying is that his beliefs are hateful and bigoted. HE is the one telling people that they should should abide by his moral code, which calls for treating gays as second-class citizens. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/86 "2012-07-29T04:09:14Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > No one is saying he doesn’t have a right to his beliefs. What people ARE saying is that his beliefs are hateful and bigoted. HE is the one telling people that they should should abide by his moral code, which calls for treating gays as second-class citizens. Right. Ummmm… I thimk we’re on the same page here. Just to be clear: Everybody, believe what you want, and be content. Your belief is for you only. The reason you get to believe what you want, is because you allow anyone else to believe whatever they want. ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/87 "2012-07-29T06:31:21Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I think a few legally married same sex couples with means should apply for a franchise and see what happens. And I couldn’t agree more. If Mayor Menino hadn’t spouted off so quickly this would have been the path I would have suggested. People like Mr. Cathy are such true believers in their view of the world that they wouldn’t even stop long enough to consider the implications for their company by expanding into states that recognize SSM. If Chik Fil A is serious about national expansion they are going to eventually run into plenty of employment situations that will conflict with the religious views of the owners. As for the question in the OP, I think a big part of the media reaction (and the quick reaction on the part of LGBT activists) to Mr. Cathy’s remarks are due to a couple of things. First, as has been mentioned, the phrase “traditional marriage” is code for being anti-SSM. Anyone who isn’t aware of that simply hasn’t been paying attention. Second, the “boycott Chik Fil A” movement has been building in LGBT circles for a while. I can’t provide an exact date but this [NSFW (but hilarious) video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO-msplukrw&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLF8A909E1F673F3BF) was produced in mid-March of 2012. So it would appear this has been brewing for a few months. Mr. Cathy’s recent remarks may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back. Combined with the company’s recent expansion into markets more comfortable with LGBT rights and this was in many ways inevitable. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/88 "2012-07-29T07:52:10Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > And I couldn’t agree more. If Mayor Menino hadn’t spouted off so quickly this would have been the path I would have suggested. People like Mr. Cathy are such true believers in their view of the world that they wouldn’t even stop long enough to consider the implications for their company by expanding into states that recognize SSM. If Chik Fil A is serious about national expansion they are going to eventually run into plenty of employment situations that will conflict with the religious views of the owners. > > . A couple that already has a franchise in Chicago wanted to meet with Emmanual after his comments. They seemed like decent people. They already had gay employees and did other things to contribute to the local community. That’s the problem with a boycott. In a national chain I imagine you get some decent owners and some assholes. I just think a gay married couple applying to own a franchise would really put the spotlight on the home office. ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/89 "2012-07-29T17:40:25Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I just think a gay married couple applying to own a franchise would really put the spotlight on the home office. Again, I agree. New Hampshire, Iowa, Massachusetts or New York would be good places to test this since they are the only ones with SSM on the books where CFA already has stores. The other point I was trying to make is that I seriously doubt the execs at CFA have considered how to handle a situation like this. They live in a world where SSM doesn’t exist so I doubt it was on their radar when they expanded into those markets. I imagine it may bite them in the ass sooner rather than later. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/90 "2012-07-29T17:58:59Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > A couple that already has a franchise in Chicago wanted to meet with Emmanual after his comments. They seemed like decent people. They already had gay employees and did other things to contribute to the local community. That’s the problem with a boycott. In a national chain I imagine you get some decent owners and some assholes. > I just think a gay married couple applying to own a franchise would really put the spotlight on the home office. The home office is still in a state that offers no legal protections to gays. They can sit back and tolerate gays working in states they can not legally fire them in for being gay, knowing if those people ever moved up to corporate they can fire them without issue. If you are gay and looking for a career with a glass ceiling, Chick Fil A would be a great company to be discriminated against in. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/91 "2012-07-29T20:51:33Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > True, but I bet it would be a nasty court battle, which would ultimately be wasted even if CFA won it. I’ve done a little research and from what I gather, cities have a fairly wide latitude in what business they allow and deny permits to operate in their area. In my own city for example, chain restaurants are not given license to operate very often; and those that are are restricted to a very small and specific portion of the city. > > However, if CFA previously _had_ permits (before the comments) and was negotiating with the city in good faith, then they would have a serious case. If they didn’t have anything concrete yet, I don’t see how even a verdict in their favor could force a city to allow them to operate within its jurisdiction. The constitution does not provide for such measures anywhere that I can see. I can believe that people would actually support these kinds of tactics even if they did work. Apparently you are comfortable with taking away a person’s freedom to operate a business based upon political beliefs unrelated to that business. That is shocking in a society that values free speech. Feel free to boycott Chik-Fil-A with your money, but to bring the power of the state to bear on someone simply for their own opinion on a political issue, one that was shared by the President of the United States less than a year ago, is absurd to me. Yes, if a city has zoning ordinances that restrict chain restaurants to a certain area, fine. But to deny a permit because the CEO states that he is against SSM is ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/92 "2012-07-29T22:55:53Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I can believe that people would actually support these kinds of tactics even if they did work. Apparently you are comfortable with taking away a person’s freedom to operate a business based upon political beliefs unrelated to that business. That is shocking in a society that values free speech. Feel free to boycott Chik-Fil-A with your money, but to bring the power of the state to bear on someone simply for their own opinion on a political issue, one that was shared by the President of the United States less than a year ago, is absurd to me. > > Yes, if a city has zoning ordinances that restrict chain restaurants to a certain area, fine. But to deny a permit because the CEO states that he is against SSM is ridiculous. I hear people keep saying that this is just an opinion on a political issue. No, it’s more than that, especially tom those seeking equality and the people that support them. CFA did more than have an opinion. They donated millions to groups that actively opposed marriage equality. If the CEO was simply expressing a personal opinion that’s one thing. Millions in corporate dollars are another. He can if he likes and people have every right to react. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/93 "2012-07-29T23:01:28Z")
Of course - but people in public offices don’t have the right to use their offices to react. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/94 "2012-07-29T23:34:18Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I hear people keep saying that this is just an opinion on a political issue. No, it’s more than that, especially tom those seeking equality and the people that support them. CFA did more than have an opinion. They donated millions to groups that actively opposed marriage equality. If the CEO was simply expressing a personal opinion that’s one thing. Millions in corporate dollars are another. He can if he likes and people have every right to react. Along with agreeing with RKATB, I would also note that you could phrase any political issue this way. The St. Louis Cardinals donated money to keep concealed carry illegal in Missouri. Isn’t it my right to protect my family? Could I view that as a reason why the Cardinals should not be allowed to play baseball? They want to deny my family the right to live! This isn’t a simple political issue, but involves the life of a 9 year old child. See, when you start down the slope, it’s easy to go all the way down. Every political issue affects someone. We can’t start carving out issues that are Undebatable lest they all be. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2012, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/95 "2012-07-29T23:54:09Z")
Actually, I think the Cardinals one is a better example. The team carries the city’s name, and is the beneficiary of significant public funding, and thus the people of St. Louis have more of an interest in regulating their operations. By the same token, if a local government wants to refuse Chick-fil-A its business - catering for high school functions, or whatever - then it has the right to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2012, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/96 "2012-07-30T00:07:57Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > He can hold whatever views he wants. Chik-Fil-A has some damn good chicken, and that’s all I care about. And I can hold whatever view I want as well. And my view is that he’s a douche nozzel. That’s all I care about. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2012, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/97 "2012-07-30T00:08:07Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Actually, I think the Cardinals one is a better example. The team carries the city’s name, and is the beneficiary of significant public funding, and thus the people of St. Louis have more of an interest in regulating their operations. > > By the same token, if a local government wants to refuse Chick-fil-A its business - catering for high school functions, or whatever - then it has the right to do so. Oh, I agree. In a non-governmental function, these cities should have the right/power to not have CFA cater its events. That’s a private business decision. Not allowing them to operate at all is a governmental function that is antithetical to the first amendment. I would disagree about the Cardinals. Even if CFA was named…(pulling out of my ass) Memphis’ Best Chicken, the city of Memphis doesn’t have the power to infringe on free speech. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2012, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/98 "2012-07-30T00:19:07Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > And I can hold whatever view I want as well. And my view is that he’s a douche nozzel. That’s all I care about. I agree that is your right. However, I was watching one of the news channels last night and a conservative commentator mentioned that he still buys Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream because he loves the product, even though he knows that they contribute to many liberal causes he disagrees with. The idea is that business owners shouldn’t be required, in a free society, to keep their yaps shut to keep from offending their customers. Businesses should be judged on the quality of their product, not what the CEO thinks about abortion, gay marriage, or the ACA. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2012, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/99 "2012-07-30T00:26:21Z")
As a general matter, I agree, but CFA contributes directly to FOTF and similar organizations. It’s not just the money the Cathys pay themselves that goes there. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2012, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463/100 "2012-07-30T04:29:02Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Along with agreeing with RKATB, I would also note that you could phrase any political issue this way. The St. Louis Cardinals donated money to keep concealed carry illegal in Missouri. Isn’t it my right to protect my family? Could I view that as a reason why the Cardinals should not be allowed to play baseball? They want to deny my family the right to live! This isn’t a simple political issue, but involves the life of a 9 year old child. > > See, when you start down the slope, it’s easy to go all the way down. Every political issue affects someone. We can’t start carving out issues that are Undebatable lest they all be. You might then have to ask yourself how reasonable and probable that is. Of course every political issue affects someone, so it’s not merely a political issue for someone. That’s kinda my point. Calling it a purely political issue as if it doesn’t really mater is disingenuous at best. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-media-guilty-of-distorting-dan-cathys-remarks/629463.md?page=6)