You know, the more I read about the Chick-Fil-A thing, the more I realize that it’s entirely possible that if the mayor had kept his yap shut about squelching legitimate business because it doesn’t conform to “Chicago’s standards,” all the while hosting and warmly welcoming Louis Farrakhan – who is openly against gay anything and is quite the anti-Semite  – with a smile, I’ll bet Americans would have been like, “Yeah, ok. What’s on TV tonight?” And, that’s from BOTH sides. Those who disagreed with Chick-Fil-A would have stopped eating there, maybe. Free markets only see green, and if they felt the squeeze, they would have maybe thought about their words next time. Or not, and paid the price. Those who did, would have kept on, same as always. CEO’s are saying stuff all the time, you know? And we make our purchasing decisions on their statements all the time…as INDIVIDUALS…not as mayors.

 

The inflated controversy would have never even come up, I’ll bet, if the one person in that town who had the megaphone and tried to use it to destroy business would not have spoken about this. First, he was being hypocritical because of who he DID think had Chicago’s values (Louis…and that dude’s scary), and second he was basically saying that he would pick who got to open a business and who wouldn’t based on what HE thinks is the right set of values. If that’s not tyrannical, tell me what is.

 

I kept reading about why people went to CFA. It was because of good ol’ Rahm’s statements and actions  again and again. Yes, these people also support traditional marriage, but they were not saying anything to be abusive to anyone else, even if it came off that way. What they are saying is, “You can’t shut down a business just because they hold the same view that our very president did until 3 months ago!”

I just have to tell those who thought it was all about gay marriage…sometimes it’s not about you. It’s the principle of the thing. The company was threatened to be shut down by the government because it espoused a certain point of view.

 

Would you want a mayor to tell a business that they can’t open because they DO advocate gay marriage? Oh, heck no! So, same goes the other way.

 

Imagine if Rahm came out and said, “We won’t give a building permit to (fill-in-the blank business) because they have said out loud that they support gay marriage. That doesn’t reflect the views of this town!” (And then hosted some person who does support gay marriage to town, welcoming them with open arms). Who would be ticked? I’d wager that many of those who supported CFA would have supported our fill in the blank business. I know I would have. I didn’t go to CFA because I live out in the middle of nowhere. But, had I been anywhere near town, I’d be buying stuff from either business to show support against government bullying, which this clearly is.

 

Once again, it was government that was the problem, and here we are attacking each other when we should be holding hands as Americans and a (still somewhat) free people and facing down this intrusive government.

Here is just one example of the many articles I read that stated clearly the position of many who supported CFA (with a little humor): http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/26/important-update-on-chicago-values-non-inclusive-chick-fil-a-out/