Chick-fil-A location at DIA paused after Denver Council cites chain's LGBT stances

I think it is even in the EU constitution that discrimination of race, sex, sexual preference etc etc is illegal.... all in 1 breath, and not something like racism is like page 1 and gets fined such and so, and discrimination of sexual preference is on page 3001.

 

I'm gonna have to see proof of this claim you've stated several times. If you can't back it up, then I'm sorry, but I'm going to be forced to lower my standards to a progressive level and report you for making the same claim several times and not being about to back it up.

 

Such a fine comparison. You're doing your progressive party well, keep up the good work.

 

What if I told you, they don't have a constitution?

 

Weird how, what you call a "preference", is up there with race.

I prefer brunettes... what page am I on ?

 

Lol.... go easy. He's trying so hard.

 

Look!
An LGBT squirrel!

 

Since you've been lost throughout this entire thread, I'll help you out. Europe has the Treaty of Lisbon. The only time "sex" is mentioned, is in Article 5b, which states the following: In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall aim to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.’.

So, in that same breath, you can't discriminate against religion or belief.

Gender is never mentioned. But illegal immigration is. How do you feel about that?

Article 63a states:

The Union shall develop a common immigration policy aimed at ensuring, at all stages, the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in Member States, and the prevention of, and enhanced measures to combat, illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings.

See for yourself here, and have fun reading.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12007L/TXT

 

Man............ It's terrible.

 

That's good advice for consumers. Companies that practice unreasonable discrimination usually face a backlash -- I have no sympathy for them when they do. And I am not a fan of the politics supported by the people who own Chick-fil-A.

But as near as I can tell Chick-fil-A does not discriminate unfairly. In fact, the company seems they've done an admirable job of keeping unhealthy politics out of it's business. I don't see any reasonable basis for dismissing their valuable contribution to this project.

I'd vote against any politician who unfairly discriminated against a business because of their personal bias about people who own part of it. Whether that politician was trying to keep out black owned businesses, gay owned businesses, or Christian owned businesses.





​

 

Agree. So long as they aren't discriminating in their hiring or who they serve, their personal views on an issue shouldn't be relevant unless you choose not to do business with them. But it shouldn't be up to govt to make that decision.

 

The problem is he's stuck on this discrimination accusation, where none exists.
The owner disagreed with SSM, and donated thusly. He's long dead.
There is no other example of CFA behavior coming anywhere close to representing discrimination... and in fact, have been an excellent example of a "Christian business".

Left wing lunacy teaches them how to hold onto the same tired talking points, whether they actually apply or not.
"Repetition will make them come true!". Especially when the target is Conservatives, Whites or Christians.

 

you can't prove CFA has discriminated at all.

you keep avoiding the question....

has CFA refused to serve, hire, promote gays in their restaurants?

If you can't prove they have, you are simply lying

and you, and the politician that denied them a spot in the airport, are actually the ones discriminating against CFA's religious beliefs


"don't believe gay is a sin, or we can't allow you to do business here" is not a valid reason to deny a business that hasn't discriminated, an opportunity.

 

If they're looking for a true example of irrational fear, they need not look any further. All this "homophobic because the right has an irrational fear of gays and blah blah blah blacks and blah blah blah" nonsense is just a made up rhetoric for the left. It makes them happy being able to think of reasons to bash those that don't agree with them.

 

again.... THEN*

 

It's called allodoxaphobia. And the left have been somewhat successful at making those on the right doxophobics. Trump is slowly changing that. If you're not aware of what these phobias are..

Allodoxaphobia: the fear of hearing other people’s opinions.

Doxaphobia: the fear of expressing opinions.

 

No, but unless I misread you, you referred to the council as acting ethically.

 

I don't support CFA in the least due to their support to organizations that fought against SSM however with that said the council is definitely in the wrong IMO. CFA themselves do not discriminate against gays in any form and that should be the only criteria that matters to the council.

 

Listen to opinions. Express your opinion.

But if people call on our shared government to enforce an opinion, they need to have more than that opinion to justify the call to action.





​

 

* .5%

I got you man.

 

Sorry. But this page is just full of people who have no problem to discriminate homosexuals. Going to decline your request.

 

​

 

They got something about human rights into some EU law that dictates their national agenda.
See that I care what exact name they gave it.

- - - Updated - - -

It's rather the norm in Europe. So it aint that "weird". The US is just a decade behind.

 

Actually, this thread is full of people begging you to give just one example of that discrimination.

Declining that request means you are all talk with no substance.

Just one.... ?

 

And there is nothing wrong with that.

People can and should be able to differentiate between homosexual and not, between black and white, between man and woman... it's when the laws and society we share tries to discriminate that folks have more concern about that criteria.​

​