This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Rahm Emmanuel’s "Chicago Values"–Oxymoron of All Times

“Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values,” Rahm Emanuel told the Chicago Tribune. “They’re not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members. And if you’re gonna be part of the Chicago community, you should reflect Chicago values.”

 To which the Archbishop of Chicago retorted:  “I was born and raised here, and my understanding of being a Chicagoan never included submitting my value system to the government for approval,” he wrote. “Must those whose personal values do not conform to those of the government of the day move from the city? Is the City Council going to set up a ‘Council Committee on Un-Chicagoan Activities’ and call those of us who are suspect to appear before it?”



42 comments:

Blogger said...

NewGuy said...

I was wondering if the local media would cover this story and, if so, how would they report it.

I still haven't seen anything on Goblueridge.net or on the Watauga Democrat website but the HCPress does have an article.

According to HCPress, the people were there to support "amendment one". While I am sure that there were some there for that reason, I am equally sure that many of us were there to support Dan Cathy's rights to voice his opinion. Wouldn't you think that most media would be stomping their feet and calling attention to the first amendment issues here? I guess it just depends on the viewpoint of the reporter.

I doubt that anyone who was there in support of Chick Fil-A has any issue with anyone else who wants doesn't want to do business with them for whatever reason....but the attempts to force them out of business by denying business permits or pressuring the University to cancel their established contracts solely because they dared to speak out on an issue is reprehensible!

Too bad the press doesn't seem to understand this part of the issue!

Anonymous said...

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/528745_10150977977022869_925602970_n.jpg

Blogger said...

A lot of local people are supporting local workers who have jobs at Chick Filet-A today. Contrast that with the Sociology major at ASU who is trying to get others to join him in putting workers at the campus out of their jobs. You have to be very mean spirited to want to hurt people just so you can throw a hissy fit.

NewGuy said...

Blogger....this is the opening paragraph of the HC Press story.


"Aug. 1, 2012. Across the country – including in the High Country, people are flocking to Chick-fil-A today to support Amendment One – or as its better known, the Marriage Protection Amendment, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman."

Of course we know that people "across the country" are not there because of Amendment 1, which was a North Carolina issue and has not, to my knowledge, even been mentioned in this context. Putting that aside....

I know that many were there in support of traditional marriage....but I also know that hundreds of others were there in support of the right of the CEO to speak truthfully about his opinions when asked in an interview.
Should we all start to organize boycotts of any business whose management has views on topical issues that we disagree with? Should we publish a list of political donors and picket the businesses of those who donated to the "other" side? How about those who donate to the wrong charities? Or wrong religious organization?

ASU students want the University to cancel their contract with CFA SOLELY because of what their CEO said in an interview.

CSA has given out $20 MILLION dollars in scholarships over the years. Should we organize a petition drive to pressure CFA NOT to award scholarships to anyone planning to go to ASU? Or to anyone else who disagrees with CFA's position on an issue?

Isn't that pretty much the same thing?

NewGuy said...

And this is what started the whole mess....

CFA president Dan Cathey told an on line Baptist journal that his company..." “very much supportive of the Biblical family unit. We are a family owned business, a family led business, and we are still married to our first wives." He added..."“While my family and I believe in the Biblical definition of marriage (between a male and female), we love and respect everyone, who disagrees.”

Not, the haters who see homophobes and racists behind every tree are suggesting that government entities deny them business licenses? Too bad some of these "hate groups" don't adopt CFA philosophy and "love and respect everyone who disagrees!"

Jus' Sayin said...

"Never mind the gays! What about the poor chickens?" says PETA.

guy faulkes said...

I do not wish to cause any trouble, but the First Amendment covers both free speech and religion, if I am not mistaken. In that case people were definitely there to support amendment one.


Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

There were certainly a multitude of people there supporting it. If the majority are there because of the gay marriage issue ( a different amendment 1 locally) and the Democrats make that a plank in their platform, then Romney might have a chance.

As I said on my post on another thread, it looks like Boone's turnout is indicative of support all along the east coast. It that case, I would think the Constitutional amendment was the principal issue for most people.

Mike D. said...

I don't go to Chick-Fil-A for a very different reason. Their "Eat Mor Chickin" cow is a Holstein, which is not beef cattle, but a milk cow. I can't trust a company to make my food if they can't tell the difference or are willing to misinform kids with bad spelling and bad Biology.

Mike D. said...

NewGuy,

You don't think people should be allowed to band together and boycott a business for whatever reason they see fit? It seems to me that being able to spend our hard-earned dollars on whichever businesses we deem worthy is the central pillar of a free market economy!

guy faulkes said...

MikeD, we raised a cow or steer every year to butcher for beef. The calf came from our milk cow. It was still good beef even though it was a "dairy" breed. As a matter of fact, when beef is sold to processing plants at a cattle sale, they buy all kinds.

Get real. This is advertising. Do you think a lizard really sells insurance?

guy faulkes said...

No one said you could not boycott Chic-fil-A if you want to do so, MikeD. However, I have to wonder if they would notice it.

Mike D. said...

"Should we all start to organize boycotts of any business whose management has views on topical issues that we disagree with? Should we publish a list of political donors and picket the businesses of those who donated to the "other" side? How about those who donate to the wrong charities? Or wrong religious organization?" - NewGuy

I'm sure someone said much the same thing when I boycotted French wine several years ago.

Guy, a personal boycott based on principles is a right we should support, not ridicule. Of course my business is not going to make a huge difference. And I don't expect others to care about preserving our language and science as I do. I didn't expect such a Progressive attitude toward language and knowledge from you. Here, let me Google that for you. Please show me all the Holsteins!

guy faulkes said...

I do not care about your link. I know from personal experience that dairy cattle make excellent beef. I also know that when feed is scarce, dairy herds are sold for beef. Your stance on this is ridiculous so therefore it deserves ridicule.

As to the issue of your boycotting any business you want, i have not ridiculed you. I merely mentioned that I do not think Chic-fil-A would care very much, even if they knew of your actions, and especially after today.

For someone that professes to care about language, your reading comprehension and use of the written word leaves something to be desired.

Anonymous said...

MikeD

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20120724/NEWS03/707249846

Sarkazein said...

I just got back from Chick-Fil-A. Supper time. This one is at a mall food court. The lines were all the way to the door. I typically will skip any place I have to wait in a line. This time I didn't skip it. People in the lines were happy to be there. I started to feel sorry for the employees as at one time, the lines were across the food court to the other side at lunch said one of the special needs employees. But, like Guy Faulkes said-- they were handling it just fine.
Some people there hadn't a clue what was going on. People were explaining to them. At one time my eyeballs began to well up a little as I thought of all these people coming together to show support for this man and his company and his right to his opinion.
Many a chicken gave up his/her life in the name of freedom today.

NewGuy said...

Guy....I may be wrong but my post was made with the assumption that "amendment 1" in the context of the HCPress article, was in reference to the recent referendum on the NC Constitution....The Marriage Amendment.

My point was that a good number of the people there were there in support of the US Constitutions First Amendment rights.

I suppose I could have made it more clear but I didn't connect "amendment one" to the "first amendment."

Sarkazein said...

Will someone please acknowledge MikeD's expertise in bovine matters so he can move on to tunas and their lack of ability to speak English.

NewGuy said...

Mike D. I never said I didn't support anyones right to boycott, individually or collectively.
I also support people's rights to burn the US flag and while I don't really "support" the Westchester Baptists Church's right to protest at veterans funerals, I accept that it IS their right. (As despicable as their conduct is)

Therefore, I would support your right to boycott Chick Fil A....I don't agree with targeting them for having the audacity to voice an opinion ...but I accept that it's your right to do so.

But, my question remains, should we all start doing this? Should we here on this blog post a list of all the issues that some local businesses might support that differ from what we support? And then, should we organize against those businesses for having spoken in favor of their beliefs?

I hope we don't stoop to that level...but I can see it as possibly where we are headed.

Put this another way.....you have voiced many opinions here that are not consistent with the consensus of the other bloggers here. Would it be appropriate for the other bloggers to gather your personal information and lobby your employer to get rid of you under threat of a boycott? Of should we attempt to disrupt your employers business because we disagree with your views?

I think you would agree that we probably would have the "right" to do that, but it isn't something I would agree with. How is that any different that trying to persuade ASU to attack a private business for the reason that you disagree with the way the president of that business answered a question on a social matter?

Nobody said...

Gay and lesbian groups are now planning a "same sex kiss in" at Chick-Fil-A restaurants Friday. Will they buy anything or just barge in, Occupy-style, kiss and run? Could their goal be to keep people from going on Friday - one slow day balancing out one really good day. This could backfire for the groups, even among their supporters. I'm remembering a line from the old Will and Grace show - "You think you're okay with something until you actually see it."

Sarkazein said...

Nobody- Exhibitionists have rights too.

Jesse Wood said...

New Guy said: "While I am sure that there were some there for that reason, I am equally sure that many of us were there to support Dan Cathy's rights to voice his opinion."

The few people I talked to yesterday didn't mention free speech. Perhaps with the primary still fresh in people's minds that's what the local's I talked to thought about.

Yet, I just saw a quote that said, "It's not about fried chicken. It's about free speech." Some of Huckabee's comments refer mayors restricting business rights to that as well and I added one.

See article now.

NewGuy said...

Thank you Jesse Woods of the High Country Press, for your willingness to accept criticism and respond fairly! This is not the first time that you have amended an article to present a more balanced view and I give you credit for that!

We also appreciate you commenting here!

Certainly the subject matter - (traditional marriage) was, in large part the catalyst for the turnout, there were no plans for such an event until the free speech rights of Mr. Cathy became the issue. It was when various GOVERNMENT officials suggested that they might use their GOVERNMENT authority to penalize Mr Cathy's business because of his views that the people came out in support of Chick Fil- A.

Had Cathy spoken on a different issue there might have been a different outcome and perhaps even no protest at all. So, in one respect, the marriage issue is certainly front and center in the controversy. But, to me, it was the outrage against his right to share his views that caused the reaction in support of CFA.

And, while the "Marriage Ammendment"- "amendment one"- may explain some of the motivation of North Carolina CFA supporters, I doubt that the lines around CFA in the other states were there in support of a North Carolina ballot issue.

At any rate Jesse Woods, I respect you for your willingness to add balance to your article. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

This is one of the better articles I have read on the subject.
http://www.infowars.com/the-attack-on-chick-fil-a-is-an-attack-on-the-freedom-of-speech-of-every-american/

guy faulkes said...

New Guy, I did not know what he meant either, so I tried to cover both possibilities. I was not trying to make a dig at you.

NewGuy said...

Guy, I never took it as a "dig" at me....I assumed that I probably should have made the post more clear.

When I reread his article however, it was clear he was talking about the marriage amendment ballot initiative/NC constitution.

At any rate, he has revised the article and (I think) corrected the "slant" of the original.

Anonymous said...

Hey liberals...how's that chick fil a boycott working out for you?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-chick-fil-a-sales-a-world-record-20120802,0,6863629.story

Anonymous said...

I think Bojangles is trying to figure out how to get the gay rights people to boycott them too!

USS Rodger Young said...

Go Chick Fillet!!! Fantastic job of sticking to your values. Although others may not appreciate your values of freedom from oppression, many of us do.

Anonymous said...

Someone painted grafitti "TASTES LIKE HATE" on a California Chicken-Fil-A building. Soon they will be claiming that their "free speech" would be violated if the grafitti were to be removed.

Anonymous said...

This is a direct quote from the petition they are taking up at school.

"We simply cannot tolerate intolerance on our campus. . ."

Seriously! I'm not kidding! You can look it up!

Anonymous said...

Here is a link with mentions of the groups that Chik-Fil_A makes millions of dollars of donations to.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-badash/chick-fil-a-5-reasons-it-isnt-what-you-think_b_1725237.html

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous said...
"Anon 12:37 do you think the graffiti would still have happened if the exec had not come out with a statement that was bound to alienate the half of the country in favor of not denying rights based on sexual preference?
August 4, 2012 3:39 PM"

Are you excusing it? Should all keep their collective mouths shut? What's your point?

Anonymous said...

Isn't that a bit like asking if a woman would still have been raped if she had dressed more conservatively?
Does someone expressing his views in response to a reporters question justify vandalism to the building of someone? Probably a franchise holder that may even hold pro gay rights views.

Anonymous said...

People, you are trying to use logic with liberals. This will work when pink owls fly in the daytime.

Johnny Rico said...

I had never tried a Chick Fil A until the liberal socialists started whining. I actually like their spicy chicken sandwhich. I'll try and spend my hard earned money at Chick Fil A from now on. Perhaps it will be my protein loading after a particularly hard workout at the Wellness Center. Do they sell Chick Fil A T shirts at Chick Fil A? If so, I will be buying one to work out with.

Chick Fil A is an excellant corporation. Their donations to their organization of choice represents freedom in America. Too bad liberal socialist lemming hypocrites are whining about it.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

guy faulkes said...

I understand there is supposed to be a Starbucks appreciation day because Starbucks' supports gay marriage. There is certainly nothing wrong with that, but it is ironic that a short while ago, many of these same people were wanting to boycott Starbucks' for its pro Second Amendment and pro concealed carry views.

NewGuy said...

Guy....the "big event" was yesterday!

Oh well, back to the drawing board!

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-starbucks-chickfila-20120807,0,2316872.story

Sarkazein said...

Opoib- The hate was ALL on your side. Desire to destroy a business because its owner didn't see it your way, graffiti, verbal assault on an employee etc. All the hate is yours, you and yours own it.

Opoib, Anonymous, Jack, USS Shepherd... whoever.

Reader said...

I wonder if ASU will get a letter?

http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/News/PRDetail/7545

NewGuy said...

Reader, The good news is that, if you read the facebook posts from ASU students, there seem to be more speaking out in favor of free speech than their are in support of the "petition".

They mostly say..."if you don't like Chick Fil A, don't eat there. But don't try to stop others from eating there!"

I doubt their petition will get much traction.....football season is starting soon so we will move on to more important things!

guy faulkes said...

Thank you for the link, New Guy.

I just found it humorous that the same people that want to boycott a business one day because of a stance the business has wants to increase its business the next day because of another stance of the organization.

Consistency is not a virtue of the left. Take HM for an example.

guy faulkes said...

Thank you for the link, also, Reader.

As New Guy has indicated, most of the students seem to be in favor of free speech.