Chicago | Chick-fil-A | News | Rahm Emanuel

BigGayDeal.com

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel Backs Alderman's Plan to Block Anti-Gay Chick-Fil-A from Opening Restaurant

Chicago Alderman Proco "Joe" Moreno says he won't allow Chick-Fil-A to open a restaurant in his Northwest Side ward because of the company's anti-gay worldview, and Mayor Rahm Emanuel is offering his support, the Chicago Tribune reports:

Moreno"If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don't want you in the 1st Ward," Moreno told the Tribune on Tuesday.

Moreno stated his position in strong terms, referring to Cathy's "bigoted, homophobic comments" in a proposed opinion page piece that an aide also sent to Tribune reporters. "Because of this man's ignorance, I will now be denying Chick-fil-A's permit to open a restaurant in the 1st Ward."

The alderman has the ideological support of Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

"Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values," the mayor said in a statement when asked about Moreno's decision. "They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents. This would be a bad investment, since it would be empty."

The proposed restaurant, in the Logan Square neighborhood, would be the second to open in the Windy City.

Note: Michelangelo Signorile is having Moreno on his show at 4:30 pm ET.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. They absolutely have the right to deny them in the city. MANY bussinesses are denied in various cities. It's well within the rights, and it has been done before. No matter how crafty conservatives get in playing martyr, the bottom line boils down to : with bigotry comes backlash and consequences. Where your big boy pants and deal with the consequences that occur based on YOUR own actions.

    Posted by: Art Smith | Jul 26, 2012 1:15:11 AM


  2. Wooohoo!

    This is awesome! Go Chicago!

    Hope it was worth the proud stance in bigotry, Chik Fil A. Looks like your bigotry is catching up with y'all

    Posted by: 2ProudDads | Jul 26, 2012 1:16:03 AM


  3. There was a massive protest by gays and gay rights groups outside the Chik Fil as in our town the other day. total success as the store became empty. barely any cars pulling up to the drive thru.
    keep up the pressure guys!

    Posted by: Max | Jul 26, 2012 1:18:38 AM


  4. STUFF YOURSELVES WITH CHICK-FIL-A SAINTS; Because, Chicago’s Political “Prostitutes” Are Telling Chick-Fil-A To “Stuff It” !

    Chicago’s 1st Ward Alderman, Joseph “Proco(pio)” Moreno, Has Gone On Record Saying He Is Opposed To A New Chick-Fil-A Planning To Open In Chicago’s Near-North-East Side.

    He Has The Support (& Backing, No Doubt In The Next Chicago Aldermanic-Election$) Of Closet-Sodomite-Mayor Rahm Emanuel; Who, Has Also Gone Publicly On Record & CBS-News Radio LYING LIKE THE DEVIL (Emanuel’s Spriritual Father) And Saying “Chick-Fil-A’s Values Are Not Chicago’s Values” !

    I Believe DuSable (The True Historic Founder Of Chicago, IL), Dwight Lyman Moody (Founder Of The Moody Bible Institute) & Old-Fashioned Christian-Fundamentalist Evangelist, PAUL RADER, Would Unequivocally Disagree, Condemn & ANATHAMIZE Chicago’s Present Pro-Sodomite Mayor Rahm Emanuel For His HISTORICALLY PERVERTED WORDS About/Against CHICAGO, THE MORAL POSITION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS OF CHICAGO & THE PRESENT OPINION AGAINST THE SODOMITES & SODOMY TAKEN BY THE CITIZENS OF CHICAGO, IL, TODAY !

    In 2011, Alderman Moreno Endorsed Mayoral Candidate Gery Chico–Whose Union Supporters Referred To Rahm Emanuel As “THAT WALL ST. JUDAS” !

    **ALD. MORENO HAS “FLIPPED” & IS NOW A “JUDAS” HIMSELF !

    Posted by: Tony Lopez-Cisneros | Jul 26, 2012 1:57:41 AM


  5. Freedom of speech never has and NEVER will protect you from freedom of consequences of said speech. I have a RIGHT to go to my job interview and say "I hate muslims, women, and Jews"....I am not entitled, however, to get that job and the company is NOT forced to hire me.
    A bussiness has a right to say what they wish, but others, including the legsilative process, has a right to deny them based on a myriad of reasoning. If Chicago does not want Chik Fil A in their city, they are NOT forced by the government to open a Chik Fil A in the city. And they can and ultimately will muster up a host of reasons (some valid, some not, all stemming from Chik Fil A's discriminatory practices) but no company is ENTITLED to open a store any place they wish.

    Posted by: Reality Bites | Jul 26, 2012 1:58:21 AM


  6. STUFF YOURSELVES WITH CHICK-FIL-A SAINTS; Because, Chicago’s Political “Prostitutes” Are Telling Chick-Fil-A To “Stuff It” !

    Chicago’s 1st Ward Alderman, Joseph “Proco(pio)” Moreno, Has Gone On Record Saying He Is Opposed To A New Chick-Fil-A Planning To Open In Chicago’s Near-North-East Side.

    He Has The Support (& Backing, No Doubt In The Next Chicago Aldermanic-Election$) Of Closet-Sodomite-Mayor Rahm Emanuel; Who, Has Also Gone Publicly On Record & CBS-News Radio LYING LIKE THE DEVIL (Emanuel’s Spriritual Father) And Saying “Chick-Fil-A’s Values Are Not Chicago’s Values” !

    I Believe DuSable (The True Historic Founder Of Chicago, IL), Dwight Lyman Moody (Founder Of The Moody Bible Institute) & Old-Fashioned Christian-Fundamentalist Evangelist, PAUL RADER, Would Unequivocally Disagree, Condemn & ANATHAMIZE Chicago’s Present Pro-Sodomite Mayor Rahm Emanuel For His HISTORICALLY PERVERTED WORDS About/Against CHICAGO, THE MORAL POSITION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS OF CHICAGO & THE PRESENT OPINION AGAINST THE SODOMITES & SODOMY TAKEN BY THE CITIZENS OF CHICAGO, IL, TODAY !

    In 2011, Alderman Moreno Endorsed Mayoral Candidate Gery Chico–Whose Union Supporters Referred To Rahm Emanuel As “THAT WALL ST. JUDAS” !

    **ALD. MORENO HAS “FLIPPED” & IS NOW A “JUDAS” HIMSELF !

    Posted by: Tony Lopez-Cisneros | Jul 26, 2012 2:01:24 AM


  7. tony lopez cisneros, are you even a legal citizen of this country?

    Posted by: michelle | Jul 26, 2012 2:01:28 AM


  8. STUFF YOURSELVES WITH CHICK-FIL-A SAINTS; Because, Chicago’s Political “Prostitutes” Are Telling Chick-Fil-A To “Stuff It” !

    Chicago’s 1st Ward Alderman, Joseph “Proco(pio)” Moreno, Has Gone On Record Saying He Is Opposed To A New Chick-Fil-A Planning To Open In Chicago’s Near-North-East Side.

    He Has The Support (& Backing, No Doubt In The Next Chicago Aldermanic-Election$) Of Closet-Sodomite-Mayor Rahm Emanuel; Who, Has Also Gone Publicly On Record & CBS-News Radio LYING LIKE THE DEVIL (Emanuel’s Spriritual Father) And Saying “Chick-Fil-A’s Values Are Not Chicago’s Values” !

    I Believe DuSable (The True Historic Founder Of Chicago, IL), Dwight Lyman Moody (Founder Of The Moody Bible Institute) & Old-Fashioned Christian-Fundamentalist Evangelist, PAUL RADER, Would Unequivocally Disagree, Condemn & ANATHAMIZE Chicago’s Present Pro-Sodomite Mayor Rahm Emanuel For His HISTORICALLY PERVERTED WORDS About/Against CHICAGO, THE MORAL POSITION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS OF CHICAGO & THE PRESENT OPINION AGAINST THE SODOMITES & SODOMY TAKEN BY THE CITIZENS OF CHICAGO, IL, TODAY !

    In 2011, Alderman Moreno Endorsed Mayoral Candidate Gery Chico–Whose Union Supporters Referred To Rahm Emanuel As “THAT WALL ST. JUDAS” !

    **ALD. MORENO HAS “FLIPPED” & IS NOW A “JUDAS” HIMSELF !

    Posted by: Tony Lopez-Cisneros | Jul 26, 2012 2:03:29 AM


  9. NO ONE HAS TO CONVINCE ME THAT THIS WEBSITE IS OWNED & OPERATED BY THE SODOMITES & GOMORRAHITES:

    AS THEY HAVE GOT THEMSELVES ALL BY THE BALLS--

    &-OR ARE F*****G THE HELL OUT OF THEIR DIKE WHORES & B*****s ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

    Posted by: Tony Lopez-Cisneros | Jul 26, 2012 2:06:53 AM


  10. @Tony Lopez-Cisneros fyi our mayor was democratically elected by the people of our city. Sorry your buddy Gery Chico lost out to Barack Obama for Senate then to Rahm for mayor but why are you bringing him into this fight with Alderman Moreno? Gay people make Chicago beautiful and everyone who lives here knows it. Its people like you who bring it down. Please move!

    Posted by: LQuinones | Jul 26, 2012 2:50:19 AM


  11. I think Chick-Fil-A is full of chicken sh-t and have never eaten there. Both because of their homophobia which has been known for years, btw, but also because their food just doesn't appeal to me. But I don't like the precedent this is establishing. If developer/owners don't want to invite Chick-Fil-A into their buildings, that's fine. Politicians should have more important things on their plate than this. If nothing else, in an election year, it's probably going to motivate 250 lbs pringle-addicted fat slob tea partiers to actually go vote in the upcoming election for Romney, because "they so durn angry at them librul politicians". There's just no net positive outcome for this sort of grandstanding.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Jul 26, 2012 4:16:54 AM


  12. Btw - the shouting comments from angry closeted trolls should just be deleted, along with the spam for counterfeit clothing websites. It contributes nothing and just makes the threads more time consuming to read through. (Of course people like Rick are not in that category, even though some people do not like what he says.)

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Jul 26, 2012 4:23:58 AM


  13. @jack. Why is this hard to justify? If the city has a non-discrimination policy, then, no, it shouldn't be hard to keep them out. Let's face facts. They can come up with any number of reasons to deny a permit to open, to build, etc.

    Posted by: Craig | Jul 26, 2012 8:10:33 AM


  14. The flagrant disregard for the First Amendment when it's inconvenient is astounding.

    I'm not saying that I like hate speech as much as I like gay speech. But in the eyes of the CONSTITUTION, they are BOTH protected EQUALLY. Sorry, but if you don't like that, you can move to another country. The entire reason that the government can't make subjective value judgments about what speech they like is to PROTECT speech from the tyranny of the majority. It's absolutely astounding how smug people are when they think the majority sides with them. If the majority decided that gay rights advocates were immoral, then under most of your regimes, they would be able to ban your businesses, etc...

    @ART SMITH: are you completely dense? The government CAN'T make permitting decisions based on constitutionally protected speech. That's basic, essential constitutional law that anyone with half a brain understands. So no, the city CAN'T deny a business because the owner used his First Amendment rights.

    @Reality Bites: do you realize how stupid that is? The First Amendment never protects you from the consequences of your speech? Wanna explain that? You mean the government can put you in jail for your speech, because the First Amendment doesn't protect you from the consequences of your speech? Hmmmmm. Your company analogy is idiotic because the First Amendment protects against governmental action. And the fact of the matter is, the government cannot treat people differently on the basis of their protected speech.

    Hell, the government can't even make decisions on who it gives its own contracts to based on someone's viewpoint/speech. And yea, the Supreme Court has said so.

    Honestly, it's unbelievable that people equate caring about constitutional implications as being anti-gay blah blah blah. It bespeaks a level of unwillingness to engage in any intelligent conversation. It's a retort resorted to when the person has absolutely no actual argument to throw back.

    Insane how unprincipled some of you people are.

    Posted by: Jack | Jul 26, 2012 8:52:43 AM


  15. It's pretty clear that chick fil a is not in compliance with Illinois non- discrimination policies. They would face the same ban if they were anti-black or anti Jew. Yes they are free to say it aloud, but that doesn't mean they can open stores. The people's elected representatives confer that right. Want a different set of stores, elect a different alderman.

    No way chick fil a will fight this- they are in a cultural firestorm right now that no business wants to be in. If its about branding, their brand is tarnished. Badly. If only they were publicly held- as one day they will be. No board and no shareholders would put up with this.

    I think there could be more to Dan Cathy's homophobia than mets the eye. Paging Dr. Rekers.

    Posted by: Rob | Jul 26, 2012 9:27:30 AM


  16. Chick-Fil-A vs. Chicago

    With all the violence going on in the world there is one controversy,
    And it is not about an Alderman’s or Chicago Mayor’s idiosyncrasy,
    It has to do with all pertinent things notwithstanding, a Chick-Fill-A,
    The denial of opening an eatery because of what the owner had to say.

    Mind you, this is Chicago where gang violence is on par with Iraq,
    Going to public school is like Afghanistan as you might come back,
    Certified dead, not from RPG’s or IED’s but from gunshot wounds,
    7 year-old Heaven Sutton killed selling lemonade was way too soon.

    Rham Emanuel lashed out at thugs responsible, “Who raised you?”
    Well, actually Mr. Mayor, the exact same question is proposed too,
    For your agreeing with Alderman Proco “Joe” Moreno on this ban,
    As company President Dan Cathy agrees with God & not with man.

    "Chick-Fil-A values are not Chicago values," this mayor has said,
    I should hope so, imagine eating chicken fingers ending up dead,
    While drug transactions, car jacking & all felonies continue to rise,
    I’ve never heard of death by gunshot for not turning over your fries.

    16 year-old Shakaki Aspy sitting on her porch, shot thrice in her chest,
    If this was on the battlefield in a war zone, maybe a bulletproof vest?
    Also shot was Leon Cunningham 18, who had been wounded before,
    Already confined to a wheelchair no longer able to walk out the door.

    First Amendment concerns aren’t being violated yet zoning is not a right,
    However, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is,” so why the fight?
    Anyone who finds quoting the bible offensive may they not eat elsewhere?
    Mr. Mayor, Mr. Alderman aren’t there more serious issues for you to care?

    Posted by: Luke Easter | Jul 26, 2012 10:06:31 AM


  17. Jack is correct. The government cannot discriminate in issuing business permits because of political views. Moreover, Chick-fil-A has an even stronger case than most because it can argue that Chicago (and Boston) are discriminating against their religious views, which would make the cities' actions especially odious and unconstitutional.

    Posted by: Javier | Jul 26, 2012 10:33:11 AM


  18. Chick-Fil-A has the right to support bigotry and to partner with hate groups to deprive citizens of equal rights, and individuals--whether it be a mayor or a dentist or a secretary--have the right to say they don't want a business that supports discrimination in their neighborhood. If the company wants to fight back to locate where their values are at odds with the morally and legally accepted values of a city, then they can. If they believe they're being unfairly treated, they can say so. (Seems like CFA has only been running from and trying, incompetently, to erase their bigoted traces.)

    I love those who believe Chick-Fil-A should have the right to speech without consequences, yet gay -supportive politicians shouldn't have the same right to say, Take your bigotry and shove it.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jul 26, 2012 10:49:06 AM


  19. For everyone disagreeing with One Small Point and Jack: GROW UP. THEY ARE NOT YOUR ENEMIES.

    This isn't about being homophobic or not proud or against gay rights. This is about having a Constitution. If DOMA is defeated, guess what? It'll be because it's unconstitutional. If Chick-fil-A wins a lawsuit again a permit denial? Yup, unconstitutional. I think it would be great if businesses that had viewpoints I didn't agree with went out of business. I think it'd be great if Westboro Baptist Church never got to say another word in public. I think it'd be great if everyone who was a bigot got shipped to some southern state and kept away from everyone else. I'd also love to tax a bigoted religion right out of existence.

    But even if my vision was one that almost everyone agreed with, it doesn't mean it should happen in America. If you had any shred of education or awareness you'd realize that the sword cuts both ways. If you allow negative things to happen to people or businesses simply because of how they think or speak, then you (YES, YOU) could also be persecuted for how you think or believe. The whole point of our movement is to say "hey, stuff like this where you persecute someone's rights because of someone's identity or beliefs or personhood? Yeah, that's not constitutional." That's the gay rights movement. It's not about using bullying and intolerance to combat bullying and intolerance, and it's not about leaving too much power in the hands of a government or a public that might sometimes vote with us, but might often vote against.

    So, to sum up: our rights aren't going to come from having extra special gay pride. They're going to come from the constitution. GO READ IT.

    Posted by: Stefan | Jul 26, 2012 10:58:25 AM


  20. @ERNIE: The GOVERNMENT can't impose those consequences. What part of that is so goddamn difficult to understand?

    They don't have a right to be free from consequences: people can boycott, protest, etc...

    Honestly, if you can't understand that basic tenet of constitutional law, then I don't want to hear ONE thing about "equal protection" from you. You forfeit the right to claim any constitutional protections the second you throw them out the window when they are not convenient to you.

    Posted by: Jack | Jul 26, 2012 11:33:02 AM


  21. @Jack @One Small Point @Javier: Thank you for having the guts to continue to espouse the one position on this thread that has anything to do with the core of what gay rights is about.

    I fear that in the last couple months the movement has become hijacked by people who want to win just by being loud and carrying a big stick. They don't realize that the biggest advantage we have is the Constitution. They don't realize that the very actions they're trying to advance come from the same twisted worldview that has allowed us to be persecuted for centuries.

    Posted by: Stefan | Jul 26, 2012 11:34:02 AM


  22. Josh, Tolab, USC Fan, whoever: Being pro-gay and anti-gay aren't equal why? Because you say so? Fine... you all are bigots! You know why? Because I say so! Same justification! I put "equal rights" in quotes because it is a quote. Not a fact.

    I'm not trolling. I got sent to this site when I searched to try to verify that Rahm Emanual (your boy) actually did something so stupid, because I found it hard to believe that ANYBODY would do so.

    And really, the only argument you have that I'm a bigot is that I disagree with you.

    Weak.

    Posted by: J.R. | Jul 26, 2012 2:17:05 PM


  23. What happened to Chick-Fil-A's rights? Everyone is pushing for gays to have rights, why is it okay to infringe on Chick- Fil-A?

    The Mayor should be for all people, therefore, he should standing with open arms to accept the Chick-Fil-A.

    Eat More Chicken

    Posted by: Cherubian | Jul 26, 2012 4:33:37 PM


  24. @Jack: I wasn't talking about constitutional law; I was talking about the right to tell Chick-Fil-A they have unacceptable moral values, just as they've been telling us by donating millions to anti-civil-rights groups. I was talking about citizens, including the politicians who represent us, having the free speech right to tell a discrimation-supporting company to take a hike. If Chick-Fil-A still wants to open in response to the protests against them, they certainly have the right to pursue the legal avenues to do so. If Chick-Fil-A believes their constitutional rights are being violated because politicians are saying their values aren't welcome in the neighborhood, they're an adult company, let them take it to the courts. God knows they had no problem going after a small business owner in VT.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jul 26, 2012 5:26:02 PM


  25. Jack, you do that: You side with CFA. In fact, why don't you send them a check to help them keep fags and cocksuckers in their place?

    Posted by: Daniel Berry, NYC | Jul 26, 2012 5:49:57 PM


  26. « | 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Kellan Lutz to Play a Bullied Straight Person in a World Dominated by Gay People« «