CFA - is the punishment valid or illegal?

[Peppergirl]

There is a slightly similar story down here, although the company in question haven't been blocked from opening other stores.

Gloria Jeans has been known for donating to anti-gay groups, as well as previously supporting a program that ran "conversion therapy" for gay women, under the guise of women's health.

They've come under fire down here by a growing movement, who have vowed to boycott Gloria Jeans until they stop donating to the anti-gay groups.

That said, it's a BOYCOTT run by local people. I'm surprised that boycott groups haven't sprung up over this. :\

Gloria Jeans as in the coffee?

[AdminAssistant]

I am very much for equal civil rights for ALL people, but banning a business based on the words/actions of the CEO is a definite violation of the 1st amendment.

[Andara Bledin]

The Chicago alderman is definitely not right for blocking the opening of a store purely on this basis. Although, alternately, I'm not sure he's actually in the wrong, either, although I lean very heavily in thinking that he is.

The Boston mayor, however, if all he does is be unwelcoming is well within his Free Speech rights in doing so as long as he doesn't do anything more active against the company.

^-.-^

[bainsidhe]

This is an interesting topic, and if the company's position is to discriminate against residents of the community, then I agree with the mayor. Part of bringing a national restaurant chain to your city is to support the community and grow. Businesses can receive zoning approval (or not) because they fit the "image" of the community. For example, Wal-Mart has been trying to build a store in a nearby village, and they keep getting voted down. Residents don't want a WalMart store in their area and are worried how it would affect property values. The mayor and alderman of Chicago are supposed to represent the interests of the residents and if the community says no, then CFA shouldn't be allowed to open a store.

[siead_lietrathua]

er... what's with the negative backlash for blocking a business for "morals"? people do it all the time. there are cities that don't allow stripclubs, booze, etc.... or is it only a bad thing to ban based on morals when those morals are "proper christian values"?

[Millahtyme1983]

er... what's with the negative backlash for blocking a business for "morals"? people do it all the time. there are cities that don't allow stripclubs, booze, etc.... or is it only a bad thing to ban based on morals when those morals are "proper christian values"?

There is a difference when a city denies a permit based on the type of establishment and the beliefs of the owners. With strip clubs and alcohol the product itself is being banned, nobody is able to open up such an establishment in the city regardless of who it is. If a city were to deny a permit to a business based soley on the political leanings or beliefs of the owner of the business, no matter how horrible those beliefs may be, they are crossing the line into infringing on the first amendment. There are other ways to try and get around it, mostly by trying to find other reasons to deny a permit, but then the city runs the risk of getting hit with harassment. The best thing to do is what the mayor of Boston did and let them know that you will not be welcoming to them and they won't find your city very accommodating to them because of what they said.

[Gravekeeper]

This is an interesting topic, and if the company's position is to discriminate against residents of the community, then I agree with the mayor.

This is the crux of the issue and the mayor's justification. This is not a "differing political view", its an issue of human rights. Legally speaking this may be a grey area, but morally speaking the mayor is correct.

Also to be clear, its not just that the CEO is a dick, the company actively contributes to anti-gay groups. A better question for those on the fence would be: If the CEO had come out against blacks and was contributing to anti-black groups like the KKK, what would your opinion be?

[Andara Bledin]

A better question for those on the fence would be: If the CEO had come out against blacks and was contributing to anti-black groups like the KKK, what would your opinion be?

Well, most of those left on the fence haven't really figured out that this is, at heart, a civil rights issue, and thus, should have been decided a long time ago.

However, while I think it is entirely appropriate for everybody who cares about civil rights to boycott the hell out of CFA, I'm not sure it's really the State's place to prevent them from opening in the first place.

^-.-^

[Gravekeeper]

However, while I think it is entirely appropriate for everybody who cares about civil rights to boycott the hell out of CFA, I'm not sure it's really the State's place to prevent them from opening in the first place.

Legal grey area, yes. However, Massachusetts does have legalized gay marriage, so from that perspective this is a company that's actively trying to strip citizens of the State of their human rights. From that perspective, its easy to see why the mayor would be pissed and may give him some more legal footing?

[daleduke17]

The politician quoted in the article apparently has the ability in his position to block businesses opening in one way or another. He intends to use it on them.

Rapscallion

Chicago politics. This is just another day to them. No one will dare oppose the Chicago political machine as the opposer will possibly end up in the poor house (if they are lucky) or the Chicago River.

But, on-topic for Chick-Fil-A: if a gay person walks into CFA to get lunch, CFA better not deny the person their food just for being gay. Yep, the owner opposes gay marriage, but, most of the decisions have to go through a board of directors, so, he really has only limited control. Also, why hurt local folks who are the front line folks at the CFA?

I don't know about CFA, but if it is like McDonalds, then boycotting CFA isn't hurting corporate in most cases (or only very little)... boycotting will hurt the franchisees, which are just local businesses trying to survive.

[Dreamstalker]

There's a possibility that CFA might/would use their anti-gay stance to discriminate against employees (if not an outright refusal to hire someone, they could fish for employee views/affiliations and use that information against them) as well as customers.

CFA's president must know about the MA stance on gay marriage. Given his own views, what possessed him to apply here?

[Hyena Dandy]

a

I don't know about CFA, but if it is like McDonalds, then boycotting CFA isn't hurting corporate in most cases (or only very little)... boycotting will hurt the franchisees, which are just local businesses trying to survive.

Yeah, and if it was 'boycott them for what he SAID' then I would not give a fuck. I'm not going to boycott over something some asshole SAYS.

The fact that he donates money against gay marriage is the problem. I don't want o punish him or anyone else over what he says. But I also don't want my money being turned around and used to hurt me. It's not a political stance, it's self-preservation.

[crashhelmet]

The only thing I've been able to find about this is that Mayor Emmanuel and Alderman Moreno are basically saying "Their values do not equal our values." Moreno has also come out and said he'll agree to it if they stop contributing money to organizations that discriminate against human rights.

Personally, I think they should let them open and let the people decide if they want to work for them or order from them or not.

[Tanasi]

The Godfather nor any of his henchmen will let a small things likes rights and laws from stopping them, this is Chicago we talking about. Chicago is one of the most if not the most politically corrupt places in the nation. Huey Long was a piker compared to this bunch. The Chicago machine will hold this opinion until the right wheels get greased.

Where I running CFA I'd take an opposite turn. I'd just flat out say the Godfather and his henchmen have made it plain we are not welcome to expand further business in the area so effective immediately in the greater Chicago area we're closing all stores and firing all employees. We will not be bullied, let it be known that the Godfather and his henchmen are more interested in pandering instead of letting jobs be created, we are leaving because of them and them alone. I'd specify the taxes that were going to be lost, wages and costs to the citizens of IL of those let-go.

That being said I don't patronize CFA because they over cook and over price their food. Besides it's nothing special that you can't get else where.

Something I find ironic about the Godfather he has all this hate for CFA but just jumps up and down in glee that Louis Farrakhan and his breatheren are in town trying to stop the gang violence (which I personally have no problem with them doing this, because it needs doing.) In effect the Godfather is saying it's better to be a racist that calls for violence than folks that believe in traditional marriage. Yeah that makes a lot of sense for an opinion of a Jewish mayor.

[Andara Bledin]

Personally, I think they should let them open and let the people decide if they want to work for them or order from them or not.

Unfortunately, "the people" have a pretty shitty record regarding civil rights.

However, since we haven't managed to get our act together and actually declare preference-equality a right, yet, it isn't really up to the alderman to enforce something that isn't yet legally enforceable.

^-.-^