Discrimination | Education | News | Philadelphia | Rahm Emanuel

Philly Councilman Tells Chick-Fil-A CEO To 'Take A Hike,' HRC Protests Franchise's Food Truck In D.C.

KenneyJimPhiladelphia Councilman Jim Kenney isn't having any of Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy's homophobia. In a letter sent to the conservative executive, Kenney told him to "take a hike and take your intolerance with you."

"As an American you are legally entitled to your opinion, regardless of how insensitive and intolerant it may be, but as a fellow American and an elected member of Philadelphia City Council; I am entitled to express my opinion as well," the incensed letter reads. "So please – take a hike and take your intolerance with you. There is no place for this type of hate in our great City of Brotherly Love and Sisterly Affection.”

Kenney also said he'll introduce a resolution officially condemning both Cathy and Chick-fil-A.

Kenney's comments come after Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel backed a plan to block a new Chick-fil-A outpost from opening in the Windy City and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino vowed to stop the franchise's expansion there.

DrudgeEmanuelMeanwhile, there's a change.org petition trying to boot Chick-fil-A from the University of Kansas campus. Also, with regard to Emanuel's aforementioned opposition to Cathy and Chick-fil-A, conservative aggregator Matt Drudge currently has the following image and headlines at the top of his influential page.

The pairing implicitly suggests that Emanuel's pro-equality politics are somehow associated with the anti-semitic and racist rhetoric that comes out of Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam, which, by the way, is also homophobic. The two stories - one of which is about how NOI activists are joining a campaign to end gun violence - are unrelated, though Drudge would like readers to think otherwise.

Finally, Human Rights Campaign and its allies today picketed outside a Chick-fil-A food truck in Washington D.C. Here's an image from the protest. More on that later.

HRCChick

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Why should Chick-Fill-A be denied the right to do business? It is complying with all laws. Certain politicians don't like the company and the opinions of its leadership, but that shouldn't bar them from entering the marketplace in these cities. Boycotts are fine but when the government tells you you can't do business because they don't like your OPINIONS, that is un-American.

    Posted by: Dan | Jul 26, 2012 1:06:52 PM


  2. They're actively funding hate groups. That's reason enough.

    Posted by: Ace | Jul 26, 2012 1:17:00 PM


  3. I agree with Dan; I'm boycotting Chick-Fil-A but does the government really have the right to block a business from opening somewhere simply because they disagree with something the COO believes?

    Posted by: Zell | Jul 26, 2012 1:17:47 PM


  4. The Gov. isn't telling Chick-fil-A that it can't do business. It's telling Chick-fil-A to clean up it's act. Business are subject to certain standards in other areas and they are expected to comply or be denied doing business. This is no different.
    I am tire of this question of question of 'certain politicians' taking a stand against the bigotry of Chick. I say bravo. It's time for someone in government to stand up and defend the gay population.
    We are not going to go back and ride the back of the bus!

    Posted by: Gary Poulsen | Jul 26, 2012 1:21:07 PM


  5. Yes, boys, the Government has the right to tell someone they can't do business because WE elected these people to be in our Government! If you don't like our Government doing this, then DON'T VOTE FOR THEM NEXT TERM! Why aren't you happy the our Government is doing the RIGHT THING! Bitches.

    Posted by: Jeff R. | Jul 26, 2012 1:29:55 PM


  6. Who is being denied a right to do business? No one. We are affirming our right to block anti-gay business from doing business with us. Just like cities that ban big box stores. Chickfila should look into expanding in Uganda, Russia, Iran. Chickfila sells hate. Plenty of cities ban the sale of liquor, why not hate?

    Posted by: Drew Boo | Jul 26, 2012 1:31:17 PM


  7. @ Dan & Zell - I simply cannot believe this worrying about bad bad government interfereing with what is perceived as the legal rights of businesses. Businesses exist within our society and are expected to be good citizens of our society. There is a very real and very major sea-change in politicians sending the message that anti-gay rhetoric is hate speech every bit as much as racial invective is be hate speech. We should be celebrating that

    Play a little game - image that instead the Chick-fil-A CEO had spoken out against interracial marriage - would you even think that it was OK to let business go on as usual?

    Posted by: Rob | Jul 26, 2012 1:34:03 PM


  8. Kudos to my Philly! Love it!

    Posted by: Lynn | Jul 26, 2012 1:44:20 PM


  9. They have EVERY right to bar them! It invites violence and intolerance. Same reason you wouldn't allow the KKK to set up shop in your town! These politicians are doing what they deem appropriate for their city.

    Posted by: Dan2 | Jul 26, 2012 1:44:52 PM


  10. I feel like a Happy Meal.

    and thankfully that somehow rhymes.

    Posted by: Michael | Jul 26, 2012 2:03:12 PM


  11. Im happy cities are doing this, but idk denying a company the chance to do business based on their beliefs sounds kinda wrong.

    If people learn something from chik fil a its that they should NEVER express their opinions.

    Posted by: J. Dredd | Jul 26, 2012 2:09:02 PM


  12. What? You mean HRC actually DID something aside from throwing a black tie party?

    Posted by: Hank | Jul 26, 2012 2:09:05 PM


  13. Just FYI, Boston University told these clowns to get lost a few months back, while NYU decided that wouldn't be "right".

    Posted by: Bingo | Jul 26, 2012 2:15:38 PM


  14. To paraphrase Mitt Romney: Governments are people, my friends.

    Posted by: Hank | Jul 26, 2012 2:21:32 PM


  15. Dan2, equating opponents of marriage equality with the KKK is not going to help the cause of SSM. SSM was illegal in America everywhere until 2003 when ONE state legalized it due to a court order. As of now it hasn't been voted in by public referendum in even ONE state. Most people will find your accusation hyteria-based. 2003 wasn't that long ago. Even Americans under the age of 30 can clearly remember that year. I personally think the anti-Chick-fil-A backlash is going overboard and runs the risk of creating sympathy for that company. Calling for a boycott of this restaurant due to its politics is one thing, but trying to prevent them from opening up new businesses is another. Almost half of all Americans still oppose marriage equality. The level of indigation should be appropriate to the "crime." As of now SSM is still a controversial poliical issue. Supporters of the ERA in the 1970s's had far more support than SSM supporters today have - and they ended up losing. If I wanted to be ironic I'd say "let's not count our chickens before they hatch"....but you get my drift.

    Posted by: Mary | Jul 26, 2012 2:21:46 PM


  16. It's really great to see so many people in power and authority stading up to these bigots.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jul 26, 2012 2:24:25 PM


  17. How is it possible that Drudge is even relevant in 2012?!?

    Posted by: Tweety | Jul 26, 2012 2:24:27 PM


  18. I'm boycotting the joint, but it seems wrong to have elected officials blocking them. It's not illegal for them to hate me after all.

    Posted by: Billy | Jul 26, 2012 2:51:55 PM


  19. Yes, private citizens can and should boycott and protest but I'm pretty sure the First Amendment would prevent the government from blocking the restaurant from getting a license due to their CEO's views. I would not be surprised if Civil Liberties Groups started coming out against the government position shortly, or the politician will backtrack and say he was misunderstood. Just watch.

    Posted by: Jacoby | Jul 26, 2012 2:52:31 PM


  20. Glenn Greenwald, a big ole gay lefty, agrees that Chick-fil-A should not be barred from these cities:

    http://www.salon.com/2012/07/26/rahm_emanuels_free_speech_attack/

    Posted by: Dan | Jul 26, 2012 3:05:06 PM


  21. There's a difference between barring business legally, and pressuring businesses with rhetoric. I'm not signed aboard the first part, but the second I wholeheartedly agree with.

    Posted by: Gregoire | Jul 26, 2012 3:11:11 PM


  22. @Mary..."the level of indignation"...blah, blah blah. You're consistently misdirected, uninformed, ignorant & out of your element.
    Find a gay friend or two and learn something.
    Trying to figure out our "indignation" from your perspective is absurd...and arrogant.
    You're a self-identified "straight ally" and you're anything but. I guess you need that ID to make you feel connected. You're not!

    Posted by: PAUL B. | Jul 26, 2012 3:15:23 PM


  23. So Dan, Which Ethnic Group do you belong to? imagine if Chik Fil A said...God will judge you because you are ------insert

    Posted by: John Normile | Jul 26, 2012 3:18:30 PM


  24. Mary Mary Mary.....and this is not a Pun.... Mary you need to open up your mind and closet.

    Posted by: John Normile | Jul 26, 2012 3:28:27 PM


  25. Although my heart tells me that "the gays" are gods children and need love too...I just can't wrap my head around their sex thing. It's just gross. I'm evolving slowly, like a lot of my straight friends...but we need more time. Can't you gays just wait another couple of generations for us to treat you as equals? I mean really... what's a few more decades, murders, suicides, beatings and legal injustices between friends? We are trying, shouldn't that be enough?

    Posted by: MARY | Jul 26, 2012 3:35:08 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «8 Gay Community Centers Launching 100 Day Hunger Strike To Protest 'Extreme Anti-Equality' In Michigan« «