Chick Fil A, Gay Marriage & The Bloggers...

There are in fact law firms within the US who will hire only christian lawyers. Originally Posted by Bebe Le Strange

Come on now you know that there are no Christian Lawyers

Come on now you know that there are no Christian Lawyers Originally Posted by WTF

Lawls, now that is funny! Yea, I forgot lawyers are equated with Devils!!! Hahahaha....

It's their business, if they loose customers over it, so be it. The whole gay marriage issue is, in my opinion, a really stupid diversion from more important (real) issues. I only have two gay friends that I know of, and the last thing they would want to do is get married.

In my opinion, the social con/religious right gives the rest of conservatives a bad rep.

(Just so we're all clear on it, all Covenant trucks have the slogan "It's not a choice, it's a child." painted on them.)

The problem I have with this argument is that it skirts the law. Under the Civil Rights Act you can't discriminate against employees based on religion. Covenant argues that the message is political and not religious so they get away with it.

But let's be serious here. The company calls itself a "faith-based" enterprise. It was founded by an evangelical preacher. It holds prayer meetings and bible studies for its employees on company grounds. You have to drive around with a pro-life message painted on the truck.

While all this doesn't expressly say "we only hire conservative Christians", it clearly send a message about what kind of people should be applying for a job. If that's not discrimination on the basis of religion then I don't know how much closer you can get.

Corporations - especially public ones like Covenant - enjoy the legal protections and tax advantages that society grants then. In exchange they have to live inside the rules society sets for them. That's all I ask of a company regardless of who owns it or what it does. Covenant, in my book, steps outside the lines and then lies through its teeth about the pro-life message not being religious orientated.

By forcing their employees to display this message and be associated with it - along with the company's other messages and practices - they are practicing de facto religious discrimination. That's where I have the problem. It's a legal issue for me, not a religious one.

Chick-fil-A does some of the same stuff but they make it absolutely clear that employees of all faiths are welcome and they've backed that up with their actions. They've apologized to and compensated people who experienced discrimination and fired the managers who were responsible for it. CFA may have it's viewpoint, but they exercise it with appropriate discretion and always stay inside the law. For that I give them total respect. Covenant, on the other hand, doesn't get anything from me. They're just blatantly avoiding their legal responsibilities AFAIC.

Cheers,
Mazo. Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

You are trying to legislate the source of a belief...not the belief itself. the real question should be whether such a message is violative of some law or not. If the message was sourced based some nutcase, who wears foil on his head, where he says alien beings gave him such knowledge...then you would be saying nothing about it.

But because the foundation of their belief is from Christinity, it somehow becomes sinister. All beliefs about social issues, whether based on Christianity, Buddism, Islam, or even agnositic, or atheism, are effectively religous issues. The left has tried to call sinsiter, those issues they oppose that are based on religion. But the opposing side of the same issue, not based on religious beliefs, is somehow not a reigion issue. Its a cute trick but starting to fall on deaf ears.

Come on now you know that there are no Christian Lawyers Originally Posted by WTF

You insinuating that TTH is not a church going member of society? All l Lawyers at some point have to lay their hand upon a Bible...now which one...hmmm..
.

You insinuating that TTH is not a church going member of society? All l Lawyers at some point have to lay their hand upon a Bible...now which one...hmmm.. Originally Posted by Sa_artman

Actually you are wrong. They changed that a while back. You do not have to put your hand on a bible if you are not of christian faith, nor religious and ascribe to atheism. All that is required is to raise your right hand when taking an oath.

Back to the chick-fill-a bit real quick: personal i suport gay rights, but I think the pro-gay rights groups should have held a similar meeting to the pro-hetero-marriage group and asked to get the same deal on catering. If CFA had provided free food like they did for the Christian group then kudos to them, if not then itd give people a reason to make a fuss about it. Also I think it should have been mentioned wether or not the manager of that particular cfa knew the people organizing the meeting. I work in a restaraunt and my boss will occasional do free catering at his kids school, something like that's just doin a favor for someone you know on your dime.

Back to the chick-fill-a bit real quick: personal i suport gay rights, but I think the pro-gay rights groups should have held a similar meeting to the pro-hetero-marriage group and asked to get the same deal on catering. If CFA had provided free food like they did for the Christian group then kudos to them, if not then itd give people a reason to make a fuss about it. Also I think it should have been mentioned wether or not the manager of that particular cfa knew the people organizing the meeting. I work in a restaraunt and my boss will occasional do free catering at his kids school, something like that's just doin a favor for someone you know on your dime. Originally Posted by goodtiminme

Agreed.

Actually you are wrong. They changed that a while back. You do not have to put your hand on a bible if you are not of christian faith, nor religious and ascribe to atheism. All that is required is to raise your right hand when taking an oath. Originally Posted by Bebe Le Strange

True, but then the joke wouldn't have been funny. Have fun much? I get the feeling not.

True, but then the joke wouldn't have been funny. Have fun much? I get the feeling not. Originally Posted by Sa_artman

It would be fun to rig the bible to shock the guy putting his hand on it.

It would be fun to rig the bible to shock the guy putting his hand on it. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

LMAO..

Now that was funny.

CFa - Their business, their food! They can give it away to anyone they wish - or not!

They have quite a presence in Ohio as well as the southern States. And they have the same consistent policies.

Umm, no. A business cannot have a policy in which they hire only Christians or Muslims or Jews or Buddhists, etc. (Lets leave aside non-profit religious organizations for the moment). However, if I do take a job with Covenant then I better be ready to drive a truck with their signage on it. Originally Posted by discreetgent

Word!!

You are trying to legislate the source of a belief...not the belief itself. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Oh stop twisting it Rud. I'm doing nothing of the sort. How can I possibly hold the beliefs you ascribe to me when I'm supporting the Chick-fil-A stance? You're just trying to spin it.

The point is that there's a law out there and that law needs to be followed. It don't matter if you agree with the law. That's an issue to take up with your congressman. What matters is that if break the law you should expect to suffer for it. It's nothing different than the position all of us here on the board are in vis-a-vis LE and the hobby.

The simple argument I make is that the law says you can't discriminate in employment based on religion. CFA respects that and does it right. IMHO Covenant doesn't respect it flaunts it. That's all there is to it. There's no challenge to anybody's religion. There's no saying one belief is better than another. My position has nothing to do with anything you posted.

I just happen to believe, as many others do, that Covenant is breaking both the letter and the spirit of the Civil Rights Act with their practices. The only reason they haven't gotten the smack down is that they base their depots in the deep south where there's no political will to go after them for it in a systematic way. They thwart personal discrimination lawsuits by their employees by including a binding arbitration clause in their contracts that forbids class arbitration - you have to go after them one lawsuit at a time in a forum where your damages won't cover your costs. And just in case the arbitration clause doesn't hold up they have you agree to court venue in the Eastern District of Tennessee - one of the most conservative districts in the country. They know that they're living on the edge of the law and do everything they can to hide from it.

Like I said, this is a legal thing for me not a religious one. I'd be just as pissed if it were a Jewish company or Muslim one. The law says you can't discriminate. I think Covenant does in subtle, sneeky ways. I respect CFA for taking the high road and doing it right.

Cheers,
Mazo.

Oh stop twisting it Rud. I'm doing nothing of the sort. How can I possibly hold the beliefs you ascribe to me when I'm supporting the Chick-fil-A stance? You're just trying to spin it.

The point is that there's a law out there and that law needs to be followed. It don't matter if you agree with the law. That's an issue to take up with your congressman. What matters is that if break the law you should expect to suffer for it. It's nothing different than the position all of us here on the board are in vis-a-vis LE and the hobby.

The simple argument I make is that the law says you can't discriminate in employment based on religion. CFA respects that and does it right. IMHO Covenant doesn't respect it flaunts it. That's all there is to it. There's no challenge to anybody's religion. There's no saying one belief is better than another. My position has nothing to do with anything you posted.

I just happen to believe, as many others do, that Covenant is breaking both the letter and the spirit of the Civil Rights Act with their practices. The only reason they haven't gotten the smack down is that they base their depots in the deep south where there's no political will to go after them for it in a systematic way. They thwart personal discrimination lawsuits by their employees by including a binding arbitration clause in their contracts that forbids class arbitration - you have to go after them one lawsuit at a time in a forum where your damages won't cover your costs. And just in case the arbitration clause doesn't hold up they have you agree to court venue in the Eastern District of Tennessee - one of the most conservative districts in the country. They know that they're living on the edge of the law and do everything they can to hide from it.

Like I said, this is a legal thing for me not a religious one. I'd be just as pissed if it were a Jewish company or Muslim one. The law says you can't discriminate. I think Covenant does in subtle, sneeky ways. I respect CFA for taking the high road and doing it right.

Cheers,
Mazo. Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

Talk about twisting it...Jeez. If the law isn't running the world exactly as you think it should be being run...then the obvious conclusion is that they are despots and there is a lack of will to uphold your...uh, the...law. And they sign the arbitration agreements for the sole purpose of thumbing their nose at Mazo's rule of law.

Yep, we can all see how fair minded you are.