Express Yourself: Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Thank You to Our Viewers

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Chicago Alderman Reverse Discriminates Against Chick-fil-A on Gay Marriage Controversy | What About Aurora's Chick-fil-A?



Chicago Alderman Joe Moreno wants to reverse discriminate against Chick-fil-A to prevent them from opening a new business in his ward because of the CEO's personal views on gay marriage.

So, let's get this straight...it's not okay to discriminate against someone who supports gay marriage, but it's okay to discriminate against someone who believes in traditional marriage.

While Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and other gay supporters such as Lisa Madigan welcome the reverse discrimination, not everyone believes the reverse discrimination is appropriate.

42nd Ward Alderman Brendan Reilly says even though he supports gay marriage, he also supports the rights of a business to operate as long as they are lawfully zoned and able to proceed.

Aurora had the first Chick-fil-A restaurant in Illinois.  The city spokesgirl, Carie Ergo, who makes over $160,000 per year, would not comment if Mayor Weisner has any problem or objection to the Chick-fil-A restaurant...or his view on gay or traditional marriage.

Meanwhile, some people LOVE Chick-fil-A...

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

They love Chik-fil-A because they like the food, not because they agree with the CEO's position (or care about it). Just like not everyone who choose to not patronize the place is necessarily against his position. I don't agree w/ his position at all, but I've never been a customer just because I want to avoid that type of food. I've never been to Sonic, either.

ddddc said...

I like when they asked the Alderman if the city was discriminating against the owner because of his religious beliefs and he didn't no how to answer. I miss don't ask don't tell. I salute Sally Ride.

Anonymous said...

This is not the governments job. I say, let them build the Chick-fil-A and then if nobody goes to it, it will close. That is the American way.

Anonymous said...

I find a great deal of irony/hypocrisy in the behavior of the Chicago pols. On one hand you have them saying that the views of Chick-Fil-A's leader are not "Chicago values." This in spite of the lack of evidence that the viewpoint they disagree with does not seem to extend into any discriminatory business practices (although I'm waiting for the first nuisance suit to be filed).

On the other side, you have the mayor welcoming a Jewish-hating anti-semite to purportedly help with the city's violence problem. Are Mr. Louis Farrakhan's views consistent with Chicago values?

Anonymous said...

Al Capone and his buddies were consistent with Chicago values.

Anonymous said...

Chicago values? Hah, just goes to show you what kind of JERKS we elect to public office. Not only in Chicago but all over this state and country. Hope sooner or later people get some sense and let the tail stop wagging the dog.

Anonymous said...

I was not aware a business owner's personal views, especially one shared with so many had any bearing on municipal approval for the location of his business. This is one of the most grievous examples of government over reach I have ever heard of, and emphisizes the growing trend of government power over the people.

Anonymous said...

I also agree that as offensive as I find this owner's personal views, as long as he's not actually discriminating against someone in his hiring or serving practices, the government shouldn't be telling him whether he can open for business or not (at least based on this). And how many people share (or don't share) his views has nothing to do with it. Constitutional rights are NOT intended to protect the majority, they're intended to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority.

Personally, I say let him open. I'll just choose to get my 16 grams of fat and 1400 mg of sodium (and that's just in the basic chicken sandwich!) elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

A business owner's political and social views matter when he uses his profits to support those causes. That being said, it's the responsibility of the individual to decide whether or not to help create those profits by patronizing or not patronizing the business establishment. What is happening in Chicago is government overreach.