Some thoughts on Chick-Fil-A
Posting this here because FB sucks for formatting, and Tumblr escapes my grasping capacity.
So, unless you've been hiding under a rock, you know the shit's hit the fan over at Chick-fil-A. Large Northern cities like Boston and Philly have rolled up the welcome mats and set them on fire with official statements that they will not welcome franchises to come to their cities. People have debated if that is even legal, but I pretty much think of course it is. Politics is too submerged in lawyers to do any illegal publicity stunts. That raises the next question, one that is interesting in my opinion. It's obvious that the Government, even at a local level, can legislate business, but some question if they should. After all, who suffers more? Truett Cathy, or the poor franchise owners?
The thing that brought me to a posty mood was this little meme type image here..
Well, that's certainly interesting. Some would even say, "Good point!" To this I say, "Bullshit." Government regulates business all the time! Letting free market have complete control is an unmitigated disaster. What if this was the image?
How about this?
What about this one?
The last one isn't captioned, but you get my point. I throw it in because it's an example of what happens when there is even slightly lax Gov regulation. Some of you would say, "But, Shannon! Those first two are vice! That's not the same as chicken sandwiches! I don't want sleaze or drugs near my children!" I picture this in a high pitched voice. I reply, so it's not ok to run a legitimate, profitable adult business with strict code enforcement, or an even more profitable home/small business just because it's morally objectionable, but when a business openly supports and publicly endorses a morally repugnant organization, and point of view, it's ok because it's food? (Let's not forget for a sec that Greed and Gluttony are also vices, but I digress) Mr. Cathy didn't just make donations to organizations who cause significant harm to gay people, but he made donations in Chick-Fil-A's name. The Company IS a supporter of anti-gay organizations and policies.
So, if I can't open a strip club in a prime location just because it's close to a family center of occupation, then screw Chick-Fil-A. Let people who are looking for a business to open pick a McDonalds, or Taco Bell, or one of the thousands of franchises they could open. Not like Cathy needs the money anyway. Don't feel sorry for his ass. He's a definite 1%er.
So, unless you've been hiding under a rock, you know the shit's hit the fan over at Chick-fil-A. Large Northern cities like Boston and Philly have rolled up the welcome mats and set them on fire with official statements that they will not welcome franchises to come to their cities. People have debated if that is even legal, but I pretty much think of course it is. Politics is too submerged in lawyers to do any illegal publicity stunts. That raises the next question, one that is interesting in my opinion. It's obvious that the Government, even at a local level, can legislate business, but some question if they should. After all, who suffers more? Truett Cathy, or the poor franchise owners?
The thing that brought me to a posty mood was this little meme type image here..
Well, that's certainly interesting. Some would even say, "Good point!" To this I say, "Bullshit." Government regulates business all the time! Letting free market have complete control is an unmitigated disaster. What if this was the image?
How about this?
What about this one?
The last one isn't captioned, but you get my point. I throw it in because it's an example of what happens when there is even slightly lax Gov regulation. Some of you would say, "But, Shannon! Those first two are vice! That's not the same as chicken sandwiches! I don't want sleaze or drugs near my children!" I picture this in a high pitched voice. I reply, so it's not ok to run a legitimate, profitable adult business with strict code enforcement, or an even more profitable home/small business just because it's morally objectionable, but when a business openly supports and publicly endorses a morally repugnant organization, and point of view, it's ok because it's food? (Let's not forget for a sec that Greed and Gluttony are also vices, but I digress) Mr. Cathy didn't just make donations to organizations who cause significant harm to gay people, but he made donations in Chick-Fil-A's name. The Company IS a supporter of anti-gay organizations and policies.
So, if I can't open a strip club in a prime location just because it's close to a family center of occupation, then screw Chick-Fil-A. Let people who are looking for a business to open pick a McDonalds, or Taco Bell, or one of the thousands of franchises they could open. Not like Cathy needs the money anyway. Don't feel sorry for his ass. He's a definite 1%er.