Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 63

Thread: Bloomberg at it again (Or is he?)

  1. #41
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    19,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    Just curious ... why the sudden outrage over Chick-fil-A? I'm quite certain there are a fair number of corporate CEO's out there with anti-gay marriage views and donations to pro-traditional family organizations.

    This seems like some sort of act of collusion to me. The most ironic part is sales will most likely go UP for Chick-fil-A because of these schenanigans.
    Agreed, its stupid. More than anything, its egomaniac Mayors just shooting their mouths off. I'm sure now that they realize how stupid they look (not to mention Anti-American/Capitalist), they'll probably shut up.

    Saying that they don't agree with the guy is one thing. To say that they aren't welcome in their city and to say that they'll try and stop them from opening (assuming someone did that - I'm not sure), is just assine.

  2. #42
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,541
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    Just curious ... why the sudden outrage over Chick-fil-A? I'm quite certain there are a fair number of corporate CEO's out there with anti-gay marriage views and donations to pro-traditional family organizations.

    This seems like some sort of act of collusion to me. The most ironic part is sales will most likely go UP for Chick-fil-A because of these schenanigans.
    You think it is just coincidence this happened right after the DNC voted to adopt a pro-gay marriage stance on its standard platform? You're correct - just as a majority of this nation agrees with him, I'm sure a representative share of business owners in this nation do as well. Good luck boycotting all of them.

    No, this has been orchestrated from Day 1. This guy threw them left a hanging slider at the right time for them and they're swinging for the fences. The Dems new favorite strategy is creating a demon and using social media and their buddies in the press to take it viral. The idea is create a mass of people who want to fight these big, rich, meanies and oh by the way, so do we.

    It's not only transparent, it's childish. Unfortunately there's enough idiots out there that follow this kind of stuff as religiously as they do the Kardashians.

  3. #43
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,673
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm a huge proponent of breast feeding, especially given the immense recommended vaccine schedule and, until a few years ago, environmental insults like BPa. That said, I feel this oversteps a line, or at least serves to blur it further.

  4. #44
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,460
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    He wants it off store shelves too.
    How about women who don't have much milk?
    Where is the woman's right to choose?

    Freedom of Choice. Why, it's a WAR ON WOMEN.
    To be clear - the hospitals would still have formula, it would simply have to be signed out by a nurse like any medication. Whether it's a good idea or not is up for debate; but it isn't "no formula allowed"

  5. #45
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,460
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post


    Whats funny is who is actually doing descrimination here.

    Chik-Fil-A does not descriminate (it can't, legally). Not in employment. Not in treatement of Patrons. The CEO has a right to his personal beliefs, beleifs it must be said are still in the majority of Americans.

    The Left is engaging in descrimination, by pledging to ban Chick-Fil-A (illegally as it turns out), protesting them for their owners religious beleifs (beliefs Obama himself held supposedly till just recently, and no one on the left said "**** him" for that!), and actively trying to hurt Chik-Fil-A because of their (the protestors) disagreement over the CEO's beleifs.

    Just sad. It's obviosu who the intolerant is in this situation. Agree with the Left, of face their wrath, their hatred, and the full force of Law they can muster.
    I've got no problem with the bolded. Freedom of religion is like freedom of speech. It means the government can't screw with you based on your beliefs. Social opprobrium, on the other hand, is perfectly fine. Just like if the president of Chick-Fil-A had said "you know, it's a shame we have to serve n*****s in here; they're inferior to white folks, but, you know, the law's the law", nobody would be particularly surprised if there was a backlash from customers.

    He's entitled to his beliefs. Customers are entitled to theirs. If they want to stay away because of his beliefs, I have no problem with that.

  6. #46
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,460
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post


    In all honesty, I think there are many more similarities than differences in our viewpoints. First and foremost, we both see past the R vs. D partisan stranglehold plaguing our country.

    Personally, I've come a long way in the past six years on this forum. Politically speaking, is there any other period of a person's life where views change more radically than his/her 20's?
    80s-90s, as senility sets in.

  7. #47
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    I've got no problem with the bolded. Freedom of religion is like freedom of speech. It means the government can't screw with you based on your beliefs. Social opprobrium, on the other hand, is perfectly fine. Just like if the president of Chick-Fil-A had said "you know, it's a shame we have to serve n*****s in here; they're inferior to white folks, but, you know, the law's the law", nobody would be particularly surprised if there was a backlash from customers.

    He's entitled to his beliefs. Customers are entitled to theirs. If they want to stay away because of his beliefs, I have no problem with that.
    Agreed.

    But I think you'd agree with me that:

    1. The belief in "traditional marriage, i.e. man + women" is a deeply held religious-based belief of all three major religions, and is still an opinion held by the majority of Americans. It's not quite being a member of the K.K.K.

    2. It is exactly the same opinion expressed by the CEO....of the United States. Until recently, the view of the Chick-Fil-A CEO was also Obama's view, and Obama was not treated this way.

    If it makes people feel better to defend intolerence with intolerence, so be it. I'm supportive of Gay Marriahe rights, and supportive of the religious being allowed to disagree without being labeled as KKK-esque and treated the same.

  8. #48
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,460
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Agreed.

    But I think you'd agree with me that:

    1. The belief in "traditional marriage, i.e. man + women" is a deeply held religious-based belief of all three major religions, and is still an opinion held by the majority of Americans. It's not quite being a member of the K.K.K.

    2. It is exactly the same opinion expressed by the CEO....of the United States. Until recently, the view of the Chick-Fil-A CEO was also Obama's view, and Obama was not treated this way.

    If it makes people feel better to defend intolerence with intolerence, so be it. I'm supportive of Gay Marriahe rights, and supportive of the religious being allowed to disagree without being labeled as KKK-esque and treated the same.
    Agreed

  9. #49
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,895
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    It is exactly the same opinion expressed by the CEO....of the United States. Until recently, the view of the Chick-Fil-A CEO was also Obama's view, and Obama was not treated this way.
    In terms of publicly held views, you are correct, but as far as I know, Obama was not actively donating to the cause with his wallet. If money is speech, then the CEO of Chick-fil-A is speaking much louder on the subject.

  10. #50
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    In terms of publicly held views, you are correct, but as far as I know, Obama was not actively donating to the cause with his wallet. If money is speech, then the CEO of Chick-fil-A is speaking much louder on the subject.
    With respect, thats a bit of a weasely way out of the rather obvious party-based hypocricy here.

    But we can explore it too.

    Should Liberal Companies who donate to Pro-Gay causes be protested daily and boycotted by people of faith? I'd say no.

    Like I said, as long as the State isn't involved, it's all good use of freedom one way or the other. I just find the outrage against Chik-Fil-A somewhat laughable tbqh, given Obam holding the same view, all major religions holding pretty much teh same view, 5,000 years of human history holding the same view, biology holding the same view, and etc, etc, etc.

    Like everything, progress on an issue will never be made by some silly boycott or demonization or a paradox of intolerence of intolerence.

    It'll come with time, experience, and the normal changing opinion of a culture as time passes, the old die off, and the new become old, and the next generations normal is the old generations edgy or controversial.

  11. #51
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,439
    Post Thanks / Like
    Is it possible that those hospitals ban formula bc of liability. If a child gets sick on formula, they could be sued?

  12. #52
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,895
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    With respect, thats a bit of a weasely way out of the rather obvious party-based hypocricy here.

    But we can explore it too.

    Should Liberal Companies who donate to Pro-Gay causes be protested daily and boycotted by people of faith? I'd say no.

    Like I said, as long as the State isn't involved, it's all good use of freedom one way or the other. I just find the outrage against Chik-Fil-A somewhat laughable tbqh, given Obam holding the same view, all major religions holding pretty much teh same view, 5,000 years of human history holding the same view, biology holding the same view, and etc, etc, etc.

    Like everything, progress on an issue will never be made by some silly boycott or demonization or a paradox of intolerence of intolerence.

    It'll come with time, experience, and the normal changing opinion of a culture as time passes, the old die off, and the new become old, and the next generations normal is the old generations edgy or controversial.
    I agree it is hypocritical, and I wasn't making any type of judgement on which side is right or wrong. Just saying, it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison.

    Active involvement is held to a different standard by the public than passive agreement.

    I find the outrage laughable as well, and the threat of government imposed bans unacceptable.

  13. #53
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,369
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Yes.

    I think they follow the Law about employment descrimination, generally (as generally any big company).



    Agreed.



    Agreed.

    Nothign wrong with describing it as it is tho, intolerence of a religious beleif, and intolerence towards any disagreement with how they see things.

    In short, exactly what they claim the right does to them. Ironic.



    Promoting, yes.

    Banning alternatives, no.

    If thats the case here, no worries.

    If it were Halal Fil-A doing the "discriminatin'" no one would notice

  14. #54
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,369
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    I've got no problem with the bolded. Freedom of religion is like freedom of speech. It means the government can't screw with you based on your beliefs. Social opprobrium, on the other hand, is perfectly fine. Just like if the president of Chick-Fil-A had said "you know, it's a shame we have to serve n*****s in here; they're inferior to white folks, but, you know, the law's the law", nobody would be particularly surprised if there was a backlash from customers.

    He's entitled to his beliefs. Customers are entitled to theirs. If they want to stay away because of his beliefs, I have no problem with that.
    Of course - everyone knows Chick-Fil-As do double duty as wedding chapels

  15. #55
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,364
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Is it possible that those hospitals ban formula bc of liability. If a child gets sick on formula, they could be sued?
    It's voluntary.

    Don't listen to people from SC. They just got internet service last week../


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

  16. #56
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    If it were Halal Fil-A doing the "discriminatin'" no one would notice
    I prefer Fala-Fil-A myself.

  17. #57
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,439
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    It's voluntary.

    Don't listen to people from SC. They just got internet service last week../


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...
    LOL. Not sure what you mean as I haven't read the whole thread.

    What is voluntary?

  18. #58
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,541
    Post Thanks / Like
    Holy crap, Warfish, I can no longer focus on the topic. That signature - I can't stop watching.

  19. #59
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    Holy crap, Warfish, I can no longer focus on the topic. That signature - I can't stop watching.
    +1 and I will add that it is 1 billion times better than the worm in the frogs eye that almost made me puke every time I saw it.

  20. #60
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Trades View Post
    +1 and I will add that it is 1 billion times better than the worm in the frogs eye that almost made me puke every time I saw it.
    Always give it a day or two, it'll be something else soon enough.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us