Denver City Council Won’t Let Chick-fil-A Open a Restaurant in Their Airport Because of the Company’

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

oks10

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
8,929
6,223
1,743
Piedmont, OK
#1
I see a glaring double standard here... Can you deny service/business based on personal beliefs or not??

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/08/400...m_term=conservativedaily&utm_campaign=Culture
Denver City Council Won’t Let Chick-fil-A Open a Restaurant in Their Airport Because of the Company’s Stance on Same-Sex Marriage
BY REID MENE (1 DAY AGO) | BUSINESS, CULTURE, NATION

IJRSHAREEMAIL

Denver City Council members are in a pickle after Chick-fil-A made a bid to renew a lease to build a Chick-fil-A restaurant inside the Denver International Airport (DIA).

The issue? The company’s reputation as an opponent of same-sex marriage.

According to the Denver Post, Councilman Paul Lopez called for opposition to the chain at DIA, stating that it’s:

“Really, truly a moral issue on the city.”

Robin Kniech, a Denver City Council Member, remarked during Tuesday’s meeting:

“I think the airport also has a question about our reputation. It has been the corporate philosophy [of Chik-fil-A] to use the dollars they earn to fund discriminatory lawsuits and to fund discriminatory political rhetoric. So that’s of concern to the extent that they will be forming profits from operating in our airport.”

Kniech’s statement is presumably based on reports that between 2010 and 2011, “Chick-fil-A’s corporate foundations increased their grants to anti-LGBT groups like the Marriage & Family Foundation…from $1.9 million to more than $3.6 million.” The MFF has a stated goal of “opposing” “homosexual advocates” who are “undermining unions.”

Chick-fil-A reduced its funding of anti-LGBT groups beginning in 2012, although according to the Advocate, as of 2013 they were still funding religious groups that some considered “questionable.”

In any event, out of the ten city council members to attend the meeting Tuesday, none defended the chain, whose president Dan Cathy stated three years ago that the “biblical definition of the family unit” did not include same-sex marriage.

Denver Chanel 7NEWS reached out to Chick-fi-A for a statement and received this response:

“Chick-fil-A is a restaurant company focused on serving great food and providing remarkable service to every single customer.

Chick-fil-A, Inc. and its franchised restaurant owners are equal opportunity employers, employing more than 75,000 individuals who represent many diverse viewpoints, opinions, backgrounds and beliefs.

We are humbled to be named to the 2015 ‘Top 10 Best Companies to Work For” list by 24/7 Wall Street and to be first in our category in customer satisfaction according to the 2015 American Customer Satisfaction Index.'”

The city council’s statements are being opposed by some, however. Wayne Laugesen, the editorial page editor for the Colorado Springs Gazette, told “Fox and Friends“:

“This is a very dangerous precedent. It is a blatant and flagrant violation of the First Amendment.”

Others cite economic reasons to allow a Chick-fil-A location. Neil Maxfield, thesenior vice president of concession, noted that a 2013 survey of airport users “identified Chick-fil-A as being the second-most sought-after quick service brand at the airport,” just behind Chipotle, which is already on location.
 

sc5mu93

WeaselMonkey
A/V Subscriber
Oct 18, 2006
10,290
7,733
1,743
Spring, TX
#2
Never realized eating a vendor's food was an endorsement of their beliefs.

Personally, I'm not a fan of chick-fila, but IIRC Denver int'l airport doesn't have that great a selection of food.
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
8,929
6,223
1,743
Piedmont, OK
#3
Never realized eating a vendor's food was an endorsement of their beliefs.

Personally, I'm not a fan of chick-fila, but IIRC Denver int'l airport doesn't have that great a selection of food.
When it comes to chicken sandwiches, I'd rather eat there than anywhere else. That's all I really go there for though. I can get better tenders elsewhere. Still, how is this any different than not selling some a gay wedding cake? Party A attempts to deny service/business to Party B solely due to their beliefs. They can't say they'd lose money because come on, when's the last time you saw an empty Chick-fil-a?
 

Philranger

Territorial Marshal
Oct 6, 2010
7,991
6,849
743
Owasso
#4
When it comes to chicken sandwiches, I'd rather eat there than anywhere else. That's all I really go there for though. I can get better tenders elsewhere. Still, how is this any different than not selling some a gay wedding cake? Party A attempts to deny service/business to Party B solely due to their beliefs. They can't say they'd lose money because come on, when's the last time you saw an empty Chick-fil-a?
This past Sunday? (and every Sunday before)
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,177
17,019
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#9
First of all, the companies "reputation opposing gay marriage" stems from a single comment form the owner that he personally believes marriage is between a man and a woman, the same belief that our liberal president held just 3 short years ago. There has never been any indication that the company itself is run in a way to exclude gay people, whether as employees or customers. This is no longer just the intolerant left, they are now officially the authoritarian left. Screw freedom of speech, screw freedom of religion....if you want to operate a business you will conform to what the state says.
 
Feb 6, 2007
4,336
4,562
1,743
Ardmore, Ok.
#11
Flip this story; if said government were trying to ban Muslims, illegal aliens, or even convicted criminals, I submit to you that the public outcry would be deafening.
 

msq2

Banned
Banned
Aug 27, 2009
13,110
6,001
743
#12
If it's okay for state governments to ban government contracts with planned parenthood for the national organizations political beliefs why is it not okay for a city to not give a government contract over the owners political beliefs?
 
Last edited:

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,177
17,019
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#13
If it's okay for state governments to ban government contracts with planned parenthood for the national organizations political beliefs why is it not okay for a city to not give a government contract over the owners political beliefs?
If 30% of chick-fil-a's operating budget came from the taxpayers and on Sunday's they used the building to hold anti-gay rallies (but none of the taxpayers money directly funded that part), then you might have a legitimate gripe. Seriously, there's no comparison at all.
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
8,929
6,223
1,743
Piedmont, OK
#14
If 30% of chick-fil-a's operating budget came from the taxpayers and on Sunday's they used the building to hold anti-gay rallies (but none of the taxpayers money directly funded that part), then you might have a legitimate gripe. Seriously, there's no comparison at all.
But I'm not surprised which side of the argument he's on...
 
Feb 6, 2007
4,336
4,562
1,743
Ardmore, Ok.
#15
If it's okay for state governments to ban government contracts with planned parenthood for the national organizations political beliefs why is it not okay for a city to not give a government contract over the owners political beliefs?
For one thing, Planned Parenthood is a governmental agency trying to impose their beliefs on the States. Chic Filet is a privately owned entity and is not trying to coerce the public to act in any manner.
 

msq2

Banned
Banned
Aug 27, 2009
13,110
6,001
743
#16
For one thing, Planned Parenthood is a governmental agency trying to impose their beliefs on the States. Chic Filet is a privately owned entity and is not trying to coerce the public to act in any manner.
Planned parenthood is a government agency?
 

Philranger

Territorial Marshal
Oct 6, 2010
7,991
6,849
743
Owasso
#17
For one thing, Planned Parenthood is a governmental agency trying to impose their beliefs on the States. Chic Filet is a privately owned entity and is not trying to coerce the public to act in any manner.
Other than to eat a lot of chicken sandwiches and waffle fries.
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
8,929
6,223
1,743
Piedmont, OK
#18
If it's okay for state governments to ban government contracts with planned parenthood for the national organizations political beliefs why is it not okay for a city to not give a government contract over the owners political beliefs?
It's their actions that most people have the problem with. No one's releasing videos exposing Planned Parenthood's beliefs...
 

msq2

Banned
Banned
Aug 27, 2009
13,110
6,001
743
#19
Donating money to an anti liberty organizations is an action that chic fil a partakes in.