I hate to say I told you so....

[blackascoal]

What strawman claptrap bullshit......what happened to your brains over the last couple of years ?.....We all slow down some, but your neurons seem to have completely stopped....

Shit brother .. I've asked myself the same thing about you. You used to have the ability to respond to civilly stated questions. You don't appear to have that anymore. Now you're just filled with anger and rage. Frankly, I've noticed the same thing about Damo.

I blame it on the Tea Party. It has turned you righties into zombies and morons. You can't even answer a simple question anymore without froth coming from your mouth.

Here's a real simple question civilly stated ..

Why would I want to spend money with a business that doesn't like hispanics, or refuses to give women equal pay, or that thinks gays are less than human? Why would I do that no matter how good their product may be?

Do you think you can answer that for me with a civil response?

 

[blackascoal]

If the Supreme Court had agreed with you in NAACP vs Alabama then the cause would have been smothered in the crib.

Yes, you have every right to not eat at Chic-Fil-A or not support NAACP backed businesses. The government should not be intimidating anyone or even helping others to intimidate. This is EXACTLY why the court has held that contributions and support of certain causes is protected as speech.

Of course, I don't really like the idea of allowing people to protest in public under a sheet, but there is good reason to allow a certain amount of anonymity. It should protect everyone.

The owner of Chic-Fil-A made his opinions known so the outing is not an issue.

Still, the alderman has no right to use the power of his office as he did. I am guessing, FactsRStubborn, is partially right. The Alderman was backed down. Chic-Fil-A probably gave him a way to save face and avoid the legal squabble that he would have surely lost. Money is fungible and there is not much chance that they can really stop the owner from supporting whatever he wants. But he can be stopped from using his bigoted views in employment practices. Sexuality has nothing to do with making chicken.

Much respect for your thoughts and opinions .. but one this one I could not disagree with you more strongly than I do.

Skin has nothing to do with riding a bus either .. but your argument supports businesses that make skin important to riding a bus. I've lived the civil rights era. I know the power of boycott and direct action intimately. I know that often it's the only recourse that people have.

Your argument supports the Montgomery Municipal Bus Line and stands against those who would rather walk. Your argument says that the basic premise for the struggle for civil rights was all wrong.

I know that isn't what you intended, but that's exactly what you're saying.

AND, it was the GOVERNMENT which finally reacted to racist obstacles that had existed for hundreds of years. Because of the pressure caused by civil direct action, the government was forced to respond and enact laws that supported greater freedom.

I could not disagree with your argument more.

 

[Timshel]

Again, you don't seem to understand the most basic concept of business .. don't piss off people you want to buy your product. You seem to be of the opinion that busness is all powerful and that people should have no say in where they spend their money.

As far as the alderman's actions, I applaud them even though they may have been in violation of some code or statute. that's how direct action works. Was it in violation of some code for students and activists to 'sit-in' during the civil rights struggle?

It sure was.

Did those who participated accomplish a goal?

They sure did.

Did the Alderman accomplish his goal?

He sure did.

By your logic brother, you would have been screaming and the Montgomery Bus boycotters and suggesting that the business owner had every right to do as he pleased.

This has no more to do with business than the NAACP members activism had to do with their seperate businesses. The owner has a right to speak out on issues and use his money as he sees fit. If he is making anti gay comments inside his business he can be stopped there as it creates invidious racism that serves no business purpose.

The alderman has no more right to use the power of his office to engage in political speech than Roy Moore.

If his goal was to backdown then he accomplished it.

Your position turns politics in to total war. It is not conducive to a free, peaceful and productive society.

This is why the Supreme Court gets it right more than most people think. They do really suck on police state violations, but hopefully that will be turned back when the true liberals stop shooting each other in the face.

 

[Timshel]

Much respect for your thoughts and opinions .. but one this one I could not disagree with you more strongly than I do.

Skin has nothing to do with riding a bus either .. but your argument supports businesses that make skin important to riding a bus. I've lived the civil rights era. I know the power of boycott and direct action intimately. I know that often it's the only recourse that people have.

Your argument supports the Montgomery Municipal Bus Line and stands against those who would rather walk. Your argument says that the basic premise for the struggle for civil rights was all wrong.

I know that isn't what you intended, but that's exactly what you're saying.

AND, it was the GOVERNMENT which finally reacted to racist obstacles that had existed for hundreds of years. Because of the pressure caused by civil direct action, the government was forced to respond and enact laws that supported greater freedom.

I could not disagree with your argument more.

My position does not support the Montgomery MUNICIPAL Bus Line. Yours does.

I know that isn't what you intended, but that's exactly what you're saying.

Those riders did not just walk. They turned to private transit.

I don't know what you lived through. I will take you at your word. But you have seemingly forgotten the lesson.

My position would not support it even if we took out the emphasized word and turned the bus line into a private organization. In that case, the policy would have served no valid business purpose. But I would have defended the owners right to free speech, as a private citizen, to contribute to the KKK, the NAACP, pro gay organizations or anti gay organizations.

 

[Timshel]

I am all for boycott and direct action. Again, don't eat at Chic-Fil-A. I even suggested how you could go one better and increase their costs without breaking any law. No need for a flash mob. Whenever you are on the road and need a break look for their sign. You don't even have to be vulgar about it and miss. It still increases their costs.

I do these sort of things all the time. When I have had time I solicit mailers from campaigns I have no intention of supporting. It's sucks for the trees, but it's fun and I reuse their envelopes.

 

[blackascoal]

My position does not support the Montgomery MUNICIPAL Bus Line. Yours does.

I know that isn't what you intended, but that's exactly what you're saying.

Those riders did not just walk. They turned to private transit.

I don't know what you lived through. I will take you at your word. But you have seemingly forgotten the lesson.

My position would not support it even if we took out the emphasized word and turned the bus line into a private organization. In that case, the policy would have served no valid business purpose. But I would have defended the owners right to free speech, as a private citizen, to contribute to the KKK, the NAACP, pro gay organizations or anti gay organizations.

Obviously you don't know the history. They noy only walked, they rode bicycles, car pooled, hitch-hiked, and got to where they were going anyway they could. Your argument is silly and unfounded .. as is any notion that it supports their right to reject the whims of the owner.

 

[blackascoal]

This has no more to do with business than the NAACP members activism had to do with their seperate businesses. The owner has a right to speak out on issues and use his money as he sees fit. If he is making anti gay comments inside his business he can be stopped there as it creates invidious racism that serves no business purpose.

The alderman has no more right to use the power of his office to engage in political speech than Roy Moore.

If his goal was to backdown then he accomplished it.

Your position turns politics in to total war. It is not conducive to a free, peaceful and productive society.

This is why the Supreme Court gets it right more than most people think. They do really suck on police state violations, but hopefully that will be turned back when the true liberals stop shooting each other in the face.

I complete disagree .. and thankfully, the message has been sent.

 

[Phantasmal]

...but I told you so. Chik Fil A's CEO's public comments on gay marriage were bad for business. Apparently Chik Fil A learned that the hard way. LOL

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/chick-fil-funding-anti-gay-groups-175154249.html?_esi=1

I ordered a new book, Christian Jihad by Colonel Doner. He is the one who helped Falwell launch the Moral Majority. He has now done. 180 and has seen the changes the Dominionist are bring to the USA and is warning against the Rick Perry's nd Sarah Palin's. Can't wit to read it!

 

[Timshel]

I complete disagree .. and thankfully, the message has been sent.

So you would have the Supreme Court overturn NAACP vs Alabama? If not then how would you explain your position.

Jurist on the left often think they can avoid case law and the constraints of legal precedent. But doing so would leave citizens at the complete whim of whatever judge they were put in front of. The nation would be COMPLETELY sectioned into fiefdoms at war with one anohter. One might be ruled by Arpaio, another by Roy Moore, another by the idiot that would not marry interracial couples and another by this Alderman.

Our union would not stand. This is what Lincoln told us and why we have the 14th amendment. You may be at open war with those principles, but not me (Rockwell and Rothbard be damned). I support the division of powers between the feds, states and municipal governments for strategic purposes only. Individual rights must ALWAYS be first and foremost.

 

[Timshel]

Obviously you don't know the history. They noy only walked, they rode bicycles, car pooled, hitch-hiked, and got to where they were going anyway they could. Your argument is silly and unfounded .. as is any notion that it supports their right to reject the whims of the owner.

Dixie move...

Yes, as I EXPLICITLY stated, they not only walked but turned to private means of transit.

The bus line was owned by a company that was given a MONOPOLY by the government. It was a quasi government/corporate partnership. It was just like so many of the other cartels brought to us by FDR and the progressives. Without government support they would have had no power, whatsoever.

Chic-Fil-A, as far as I know, was not granted any exclusive right to sale chicken in Chicago.

 

[zappasguitar]

Absolutely.

Why would I want to spend money with a business that doesn't like hispanics, or refuses to give women equal pay, or that thinks gays are less than human? Why would I do that no matter how good their product may be?

Business 102: Keep your politics out of your business unless politics is your business.



That is super-duper-uber ridiculous.

Are you of the opinion that people don't have the right to spend THEIR money where THEY want to spend it? Is that your idea of "free speech?"

He sure had that opinion when it was enraged Righties boycotting The Dixie Chicks for saying they didn't like President Bush.

 

[Timshel]

Dixie move...

Yes, as I EXPLICITLY stated, they not only walked but turned to private means of transit.

The bus line was owned by a company that was given a MONOPOLY by the government. It was a quasi government/corporate partnership. It was just like so many of the other cartels brought to us by FDR and the progressives. Without government support they would have had no power, whatsoever.

Chic-Fil-A, as far as I know, was not granted any exclusive right to sale chicken in Chicago.

Besides that, as I stated, Chic-Fil-A should enjoy no right to discriminate against lifestyle choices in their BUSINESS. The bus line was doing that.

But the owner has every right to support whatever he likes outside of that. The use of government force to stop or intimidate him is a clear violation of his first amendment and fourteenth amendment rights.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Which is exactly what happened. Where's the problem?

There is no problem with those who chose not to eat there. The problem, which has been pointed out to you repeatedly, is with the Alderman deciding to withhold permits due to the exercise of free speech by the CEO of Chik. THAT is the problem. He does not have that right, in fact it is a violation of the Constitutional protections that the CEO has.

Let me know what problem you are having comprehending that.

People in business can do whatever they want. They can hang confederate flags in black neighborhoods if they want. They can flay a nazi flag in Jewish neighborhoods if they want .. and Chic Fila can hate gays if they want. Where is your argument?

Of course they would be stupid to believe that anyone is going to buy their product .. Business 101.

AGAIN... NO ONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THE ABOVE. NO ONE HAS A PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE DECIDING NOT TO DO BUSINESS WITH CHIK. THE PROBLEM IS WITH A POLITICIAN ABUSING HIS POWER.

What you ignore is that people have a right to spend THEIR money anywhere THEY want. Businesses can do what they want, and so can customers.

How is it that you're having such a difficult time with this very basic concept of business and freedom.

How is it that you are having such a problem comprehending that I have stated (as have others) that NONE OF US HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE ABOVE.

How is it that you continue to IGNORE what we DO have a problem with?

Again, you don't seem to understand the most basic concept of business .. don't piss off people you want to buy your product. You seem to be of the opinion that busness is all powerful and that people should have no say in where they spend their money.

AGAIN, you don't seem to want to stop creating this same straw man over and over and over and over and over and over again.

As far as the alderman's actions, I applaud them even though they may have been in violation of some code or statute. that's how direct action works.

So you think it is ok for an alderman to punish people for expressing their religious beliefs? I don't think you understand our Constitutional rights. You many want to read up on them.

Was it in violation of some code for students and activists to 'sit-in' during the civil rights struggle? It sure was.

Did those who participated accomplish a goal?

They sure did.

Do you understand the difference between CITIZENS protesting/taking direct action and a POLITICIAN penalizing someone for free speech? I don't think you do.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

I am all for boycott and direct action. Again, don't eat at Chic-Fil-A. I even suggested how you could go one better and increase their costs without breaking any law. No need for a flash mob. Whenever you are on the road and need a break look for their sign. You don't even have to be vulgar about it and miss. It still increases their costs.

I do these sort of things all the time. When I have had time I solicit mailers from campaigns I have no intention of supporting. It's sucks for the trees, but it's fun and I reuse their envelopes.

I use their business reply envelopes to send them other junk mail, sometimes other campaign adverts.

 

[Rationalist]

I ate at Chick-fil-A when I was in Texas earlier this month. It was awesome. Wish I had one here in WA.

The title of this thread is inaccurate, though. When did Mutt ever "tell us so"?

 

[Disillusioned]

I hope that when I am 50+, and the youthful generation wants equal rights for their sex robots, that I don't stand in their way either.

Might end up drawing that line. I'm expecting the next big argument from religion to end up being about babies born in a machine, no woman involved, just egg and sperm, but I think we're as far from that as we are from intelligent sex robots.

Hell, I'm not sure we'll see the end of this decade. Just when you think the nuclear issues are over, they come back up again. MASS SUICIDES

 

[Jarod]

I love when Social Activism works to defund hate.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I use their business reply envelopes to send them other junk mail, sometimes other campaign adverts.

Nice! I'll have to remember that. I never put my name on the "Do Not Call" list cause I had to much fun pulling pranks on telemarketers. Word must have gotten around cause they stopped calling me.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I ate at Chick-fil-A when I was in Texas earlier this month. It was awesome. Wish I had one here in WA.

The title of this thread is inaccurate, though. When did Mutt ever "tell us so"?

Like about two months ago Gerber and it's greazy breaded fried chicken parts. No different than any greazy breaded fried chicken parts I can get at any other greazy spoon fast food joint. Up your standards son!!

 

[Jarod]

Nice! I'll have to remember that. I never put my name on the "Do Not Call" list cause I had to much fun pulling pranks on telemarketers. Word must have gotten around cause they stopped calling me.

THat would be a Federal Crime, its called mail fraud. I had a friend who got in trouble in HS for doing that.