Chick-fil-a Support Day and Free Speech

barbino · #1 08-01-2012, 10:22 PM

Who else went to the Mike Huckabee-sponsored Chick-fil-a Support Day today (Wednesday)? I went with a group from church & we stood in line for 2 hours in the hot sun. The police were there just in case because there were so many cars and people. The drive-thru was packed.

I've never had a meal there before, and the salads, chicken sandwiches, waffle fries, and brownies were wonderful. I was really impressed by the service. They brought ice water in cups out to the crowd that was in line! They waited on the two older women who were with us and took their money, ordered their food, and served it to them. There were tons of employees checking to see how everyone was doing & if they needed anything. Overall, I was really impressed with the company and its employees.

It seemed that not all who went were against gay marriage, but everyone backed free speech. This day was a way to show support for the company's chief executive Don Cathy's right to speak about just what he believed in -- a right protected by the US Constitution (the first amendment).

DrPhil · #2 08-01-2012, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barbino

I've never had a meal there before....

LOL.

Free speech means that you can say/do what you want within reason and people can respond to what you say/do within reason. The End.

Have you already voted?

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...d.php?t=128334

Greek_or_Geek? · #3 08-01-2012, 10:35 PM

I went today too and it was my first time eating there as well. It was extremely crowded even though it wasn't at a peak meal time, with two drive through lines wrapping around the building twice and a line out the door. The staff was wonderful, helpful and cheery on what was a grueling hot day, taking orders outside in the hot sun and serving people in impressive time. I was definitely impressed with their food and I will be back as much as my waistline will allow.

For me it all came down to free speech too. No matter how I feel about gay marriage, when the Chicago, SF and Boston mayors started blustering about Chick-Fil-a not being welcome in their towns because their political and religious beliefs differed from their own, that's when I decided to get involved. It repulsed me, and I was glad to see that even the ACLU recognized the issue.

DrPhil · #4 08-01-2012, 10:42 PM

Homosexuality and same-sex partnerships are by no means a "condition" but....

Would there be an (insert company) appreciation day and would the ACLU get involved if the (insert company) CEO said that her/his traditional religious views regarding the family support the notion that people with a diagnosed mental or physical condition should not be allowed to be married or have children?

Freedom of speech, indeed.

thetaj · #5 08-01-2012, 10:42 PM

Serious question: How is this Mike Huckabee-sponsored? I really don't know. I just heard it through the grape vine that it was support Chick-fil-A day but it sounded like a word-of-mouth thing and not a full-blown political move.

I didn't eat there today but I'm not boycotting it. They make a damn good chicken biscuit and that's about as much energy as I can dedicate to giving a shit about a fast-food restaurant.

barbino · #6 08-01-2012, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

LOL.

Free speech means that you can say/do what you want within reason and people can respond to what you say/do within reason. The End.

Have you already voted?

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...d.php?t=128334

Yes, I voted. You can read my post in that thread. This was not about boycotting Chick-fil-a. This was about taking a stand about issues that I personally believe in. I doubted that I was the only one on this board who went and chose to support the company. My decision to go was based on entirely different reasons than those considered in the boycott thread. This is why I chose to start a new thread instead of adding to the one about boycotting.

Greek_or_Geek? · #7 08-01-2012, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Homosexuality and same-sex partnerships are by no means a "condition" but....

Would there be an (insert company) appreciation day and would the ACLU get involved if the (insert company) CEO said that her/his traditional religious views regarding the family support the notion that people with a diagnosed mental or physical condition should not be allowed to be married or have children?

Freedom of speech, indeed.

Again, like I said for me personally, it wasn't about the message at all. It was about a bunch of political goons telling a company that their company was not welcome in their fair burgs because their religious/political views differed from the powers that be there.

DrPhil · #8 08-01-2012, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barbino

This was not about boycotting Chick-fil-a. This was about taking a stand about issues that I personally believe in. I doubted that I was the only one on this board who went chose to support the company. My decision to go was based on entirely different reasons than those considered in the boycott thread. This is why I chose to start a new thread instead of adding to the one about boycotting.

It was about eating at Chick-Fil-A for the first time for the sake of supporting Chick-Fil-A for the first time and therefore explicitly doing the opposite of boycotting. I know.

I don't care about the new thread. I just wanted to know if you voted in the boycott thread.

MysticCat · #9 08-01-2012, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Would there be an (insert company) appreciation day and would the ACLU get involved if the (insert company) CEO said that her/his traditional religious views regarding the family support the notion that people with a diagnosed mental or physical condition should not be allowed to be married or have children?

Given that the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of Neo-Nazis and the KKK, then yeah, I can imagine them getting involved if government officials suggested that a company should stay out of that official's city based on the speech of the company's CEO, regardless of what that speech was.

DrPhil · #10 08-01-2012, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greek_or_Geek?

Again, like I said for me personally, it wasn't about the message at all. It was about a bunch of political goons telling a company that their company was not welcome in their fair burgs because their religious/political views differed from the powers that be there.

I am not talking about personally. I asked about group dynamics of whether there would even be an appreciation day and the ACLU involved.

As for personally:
I still believe that almost everyone has a viewpoint that they absolutely cannot and will not tolerate, freedom of speech be damned, and if a person or company expouses such a viewpoint they would have no problem boycotting that company and having the company banned from the vicinity if possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Given that the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of Neo-Nazis and the KKK, then yeah, I can imagine them getting involved if government officials suggested that a company should stay out of that official's city based on the speech of the company's CEO, regardless of what that speech was.

Thanks for reminding me about the ACLU.

sigmadiva · #11 08-01-2012, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Homosexuality and same-sex partnerships are by no means a "condition" but....

Would there be an (insert company) appreciation day and would the ACLU get involved if the (insert company) CEO said that her/his traditional religious views regarding the family support the notion that people with a diagnosed mental or physical condition should not be allowed to be married or have children?

Freedom of speech, indeed.

Yes, free speech indeed. Its just that, speech. The CEO expressed his views.

As far as I have read, the CEO did not ban gay people from working and eating at his restaurants. He just spoke his mind.

Its how I feel about the KKK - I don't like what they say and what they stand for, but as long as they are talking, then they can talk all they want. Now, when they get physical, I'll take action.

KSig RC · #12 08-01-2012, 11:04 PM

First, "Free Speech" as outlined in the First Amendment doesn't apply to this issue at all.

Second, you know who would probably love to freely express their love for their partners, shouting from the rooftops their commitment to each other through legal marriage, freely and in a manner protected from government interference?

Gay people.

MysticCat · #13 08-01-2012, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I still believe that almost everyone has a viewpoint that they absolutely cannot and will not tolerate, freedom of speech be damned, and if a person or company expouses such a viewpoint they would have no problem boycotting that company and having the company banned from the vicinity.

As you alluded to earlier, freedom of speech does not mean that you can say whatever you want to without criticism (or boycotts of your business). It means that, absent something like endangering people (like shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater), the government cannot censor your speech or punish you for your speech.

People in a city signing a petition or letter to the company CEO saying we don't like your position and we don't want to see you come to our town = those people exercising their own free speech rights.

But the mayor of the city saying the same thing in his capacity as mayor (rather than his capacity as just another citizen) does get a bit too close to government censorship of speech.

KSig RC · #14 08-01-2012, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Yes, free speech indeed. Its just that, speech. The CEO expressed his views.

As far as I have read, the CEO did not ban gay people from working and eating at his restaurants. He just spoke his mind.

And nobody is closing down any CFA stores, or issuing bans - the mayors also utilized speech to condemn the CEO's bigotry.

The mayor is, of course, a state actor - but until an agency or actor takes action against CFA based on speech, no rights have been violated. Weird that the Religious Right would choose to posture on this event by decrying the posturing of others. Absurdity abounds.

DrPhil · #15 08-01-2012, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Yes, free speech indeed. Its just that, speech. The CEO expressed his views.

As far as I have read, the CEO did not ban gay people from working and eating at his restaurants. He just spoke his mind.

Until views are expressed that offend those in power. It is okay to offend power minorities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigmadiva

Its how I feel about the KKK - I don't like what they say and what they stand for, but as long as they are talking, then they can talk all they want. Now, when they get physical, I'll take action.

Then I am sure you would patronize a company with a CEO who is in the KKK or is a KKK sympathizer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

First, "Free Speech" as outlined in the First Amendment doesn't apply to this issue at all.

Second, you know who would probably love to freely express their love for their partners, shouting from the rooftops their commitment to each other through legal marriage, freely and in a manner protected from government interference?

Gay people.

"They can do whatever they want! I just don't want to see it! Don't do it where I can see it!! Which is everywhere outside of your house."

I have to add this constant use of "freedom of speech" to my list of inapplicable yet overused phrases and words. Right up there with "politically correct" and "race card."